261455 grammar talk covers - sue horner · about written grammar before putting new ideas to the...
Post on 24-May-2018
224 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
First published in 2004
© Qualifications and Curriculum Authority 2004
ISBN 1 85838 552 0
Reproduction, storage, adaptation or translation, in any form or by any means, of this publication is
prohibited without prior written permission of the publisher, unless within the terms of licences issued
by the Copyright Licensing Agency. Excerpts may be reproduced for the purpose of research, private
study, criticism or review, or by educational institutions solely for educational purposes, without
permission, providing full acknowledgement is given.
Printed in Great Britain.
The Qualifications and Curriculum Authority is an exempt charity under Schedule 2 of the
Charities Act 1993.
Qualifications and Curriculum Authority
83 Piccadilly
London W1J 8QA
www.qca.org.uk/
Contents
Acknowledgements 2
Preface 3
Starting points and classroom procedures 4
Introduction 6Making talk visible 6
Reasons for teaching about talk 6
The grammar of spoken English 8Characteristics of spoken language 8
A sample stretch of talk: a grammatical perspective 12
Dialects of spoken English 14
Some core grammatical features of spoken English 15Signalling the shape and structure of talk 15
Communicating in real time and space 18
Communicating face to face 21
Links between the grammatical features 23
Foregrounding spoken English: classroom investigations 24Great Britons: Year 10 – discourse markers 25
Tying knots: Year 7 – deixis 30
Is anything missing?: Year 12 – ellipsis 35
Telling tales: Year 10 – spoken clause structure 40
Negotiating through talk: Year 8 – purposefully vague language 44
Formality and informality: Year 7 – modal expressions 48
Approaches to spoken English in the classroom 53Focus on talk as talk 53
Developing the national curriculum programmes of study 54
Using the strategy objectives for teaching 55
Finding opportunities on the speech–writing continuum 57
Useful resources 60
Further reading 60
1
Acknowledgements
The QCA English team is grateful to the many teachers, advisers and researchers who have
contributed to the shaping of ideas in this publication, together with colleagues from the DfES,
Ofsted and the primary and key stage 3 national strategies.
Particular thanks are due to Professor Ronald Carter of the University of Nottingham whose
work on spoken English provided the foundation for this project. Professor Carter had a major
role in the work, from identifying the features for study and guiding the work in schools to
drafting sections of the publication. Professor Carter has been able to draw on corpus evidence
on spoken English from the Cambridge and Nottingham Corpus of Discourse of English
(CANCODE) project. Copyright of the corpus is owned by Cambridge University Press and
thanks are due to Cambridge University Press as well as to Professor Michael McCarthy
(co-director of CANCODE) for permission to use examples from the corpus and from Carter
and McCarthy (forthcoming).
We would also like to acknowledge the collaboration of the major subject associations:
the English Association, the National Association for Drama, the National Association for
Language Development in the Curriculum, the National Association for the Teaching of
English, the National Association of Advisers in English and the United Kingdom Literacy
Association. We would like to thank them for their help in taking forward aspects of the work.
Particular thanks are due to the following teachers and schools and their pupils:
Joe Byrne, Seven Kings High School, Ilford
Andrew Cox, Willenhall Comprehensive School, Willenhall
Martin Drury, King Edward Five Ways School, Birmingham
Kevin Eames, Wootton Bassett School, Wootton Bassett
Jane Edwards, St John the Baptist CE Primary School, Leicester
Sarah Farthing, Abbot Beyne School, Burton-on-Trent
Kerry Forster, St Wilfrid’s School, Sheffield
Caroline Gibson, St Martin’s School, Brentwood
David Gilbert, Eaton Bank School, Congleton
Kate Harris, Bishop Stopford School, Kettering
Chiquita Henson, Cirencester Deer Park School, Gloucester
Sue Hillstead, Hassenbrook School, Stanford-le-Hope
Tracey Loverock, Windsor Girls’ School, Windsor
Nick Murray, Wood Green High School, Wednesbury
Isabel Palmer, Hardenhuish School, Chippenham
Ravi Pawar, Pen Y Dre High School, Merthyr Tydfil
Bernadette Pearce, Madeley High School, Madeley
John Perry, Pool School and Community College, Pool
Eddie Slater, Oathall Community School, Haywards Heath
Ben Sugden, Castle School, Bristol
Chris Sutcliffe, Huntcliffe School, Gainsborough
Additional photographs reproduced courtesy of educationphotos.co.uk,
© John Walmsley Photography.
2
Preface
The English national curriculum is made up of three components: speaking and listening,
reading, and writing. Several recent initiatives have aimed to develop the teaching of speaking
and listening both in English lessons and as a key component of other curriculum subjects.
These initiatives include:
■ Speaking, listening, learning: working with children in key stages 1 and 2 (DfES, 2003)
■ Giving a voice (QCA, 2003)
■ Year 7 – Speaking and listening bank (DfES, 2001)
■ speaking and listening objectives in the Key objectives banks for years 7/8/9 (DfES, 2002)
■ Drama objectives bank (DfES, 2003)
■ Drama in schools (Arts Council England, 2003).
This publication addresses a different set of questions about talk in the classroom. The main
theme of this publication is what kind of shared language we can use to describe talk itself,
rather than dealing with where, when or how to raise standards in spoken language. It builds
on New perspectives on spoken English in the classroom (QCA, 2003), which explored new
approaches to teaching spoken English, ranging from suggestions about defining a canon of
spoken texts to descriptions of the ways different kinds of talk support thinking and learning.
A key paper in New perspectives drew on extensive computerised collections of spontaneous
conversation to select core features whose use and frequency gives us the making of a
grammatical description of spoken language. A group of teachers subsequently worked with
us over several terms to find ways of teaching these features in their classrooms and to assess
their value to existing schemes of work. Their work forms the basis for a large part of
this publication.
The approach taken in this publication is similar to The grammar papers (QCA, 1998) and
Not whether but how (QCA, 1999). These earlier publications surveyed current thinking
about written grammar before putting new ideas to the test in the classroom.
The grammatical features of spoken English are not intended as an additional requirement for
teaching. Neither the English national curriculum nor the key stage 3 strategy Framework for
teaching English (DfES, 2001) sets out an explicit set of requirements for teaching the grammar
of spoken English, although the importance of teaching about talk is central to both these
documents. The investigations show that systematic ways of analysing and describing spoken
language have beneficial spin-offs in the classroom. However, it is up to individual teachers and
departments to make their own decisions about how to incorporate or adapt any of the
approaches outlined here, perhaps using some of the suggestions offered in the ‘Starting points
and classroom procedures’ section.
Comments about this publication are welcome and should be sent to:
Janet White, English team
whitej@qca.org.uk
QCA, 83 Piccadilly, London W1J 8QA
3
Starting points and classroomprocedures
The material in this publication offers different possibilities for teachers and schools who want
to review their current provision in developing opportunities for work on spoken language.
Choosing a starting point depends on school circumstances, current provision, development
plans and priorities. Here are some suggestions for starting points:
■ make talk visible
■ select a grammatical feature to teach
■ embed the features in longer-term planning
■ look for creative uses of spoken language in writing.
Select a grammatical feature to teach
Read through the classroom investigations in section 4 and, with a colleague who
teaches the same year group, select one feature to teach over three lessons. Follow or
adapt the approaches suggested in the investigation, and compare notes on
success/progress at the end of a half term.
■ Were there benefits in raising the profile of spoken language in this way?
■ Did pupils’ ability to use the feature change significantly?
■ What implications does the focus on spoken grammar have for other work in English
or different parts of the curriculum?
Make talk visible
Most pupils are surprised and intrigued by seeing transcripts of talk. Simply recording a
short discussion between pupils and transcribing a couple of minutes of it will provide
material for work on any number of significant features. For example, use a brief
transcript alongside the description of some of the key characteristics of spoken language
in section 2. This gives pupils an opportunity to see:
■ how face-to-face communication affects the language speakers use
■ how speakers signal changes of topic or intention to their listeners
■ the ways speakers work with ‘real time’ constraints to ensure that their meanings
are clear.
4
Work of this kind on spoken language also prompts questions about classroom procedures.
Based on your own adaptation of ideas in this publication, you may find it useful to discuss
with colleagues what the work shows about the following.
■ Teaching techniques – how does teachers’ behaviour encourage pupils to focus on talk and
encourage them to talk about talk? For example, wait time, use of questioning, body
language and tone of voice.
■ Evidence of pupils’ learning – what does a focus on talk reveal about the way pupils learn?
For example, making intuitive knowledge about language explicit, promoting clearer
awareness of how to use talk effectively, and clarifying some distinctions between ways of
talking and ways of writing.
■ Classroom management and organisation – what forms of classroom management are
effective in allowing focused attention to talk? Consider, for example, particular types of
groupings, investigative work in which pupils devise and follow their own questions, and
collaborative working between AS/A level students and those in earlier key stages.
Look for creative uses of spoken language in writing
The work of the project was based firmly on talk in its own right. Nevertheless, a total
separation of spoken and written language is artificial and unhelpful. Fruitful links can
be made to:
■ the techniques for writing realistic dialogue and a knowledge of how actual
conversation works
■ how contemporary prose writers exploit characteristics of spoken language for
particular effects and purposes.
Some of these stylistic choices are analysed in section 5 in the context of suggestions for
classroom activities. Working with pupils on these aspects of the speech–writing
continuum provides easy access to broader study of language variation.
Embed the features in longer-term planning
Begin by establishing some general awareness of the nature of spoken English through
informal investigative work. Then read and discuss section 3 with the whole department.
Consider the possibilities for embedding the core grammatical features in schemes of
work that span key stages 3 and 4.
■ What are the opportunities for more explicit teaching about spoken grammar in
relation to the key stage 3 Framework for teaching English objectives or as part of
GCSE, along lines suggested in section 5?
■ What picture of progression emerges from teaching about spoken grammar to
different year groups?
5
Introduction
Making talk visible
Talk is something that most people can do very naturally and unselfconsciously. It is easy to
overlook how successfully people do it and to neglect the precise nature of spoken language.
When we talk, the human mind shows a remarkable capacity for dealing with large amounts of
information. The processes involved are dynamic, constantly changing and fluctuating as new
meanings emerge. These processes place demands on speakers and listeners. Our ability to
record, interpret, adjust to and use spoken language to create meanings, often with the mind
working at very great speeds, underlines that when we speak we are using language at
full stretch.
This publication focuses on the grammatical features of talk that make possible the largely
unconscious agility, rapidity and subtlety of spoken language. Other projects have looked at the
purposes of various kinds of talk, such as spoken narratives, recounts, debating and discussion.
The investigative work of this project confirmed the value of talk in learning, but was not its
main focus. We put the language of talk under the microscope and increased teachers’ and
pupils’ knowledge about the grammatical organisation of talk. This approach has both direct
and indirect benefits to broader teaching agendas designed to increase pupils’ competence in
using spoken English.
Reasons for teaching about talk
One aim of this work is to balance a long history of attention to written grammars and written
language organisation by showing how systematically spoken language is organised. Work with
teachers and pupils has demonstrated that teaching about talk from this point of view has
intrinsic interest, especially when pupils can work on their own spoken language through the
use of simple transcripts or recordings.
Talk is also the first form of language most of us learn, but we rarely reflect on what it is that
we have learnt, or whether we know enough about this basic system of communication.
Moreover, spoken language deserves attention in its own right because of the special and
distinct characteristics that enable speakers to communicate complex ideas and feelings in
changing and fluid environments – quite unlike the situation typical of writers composing
‘in tranquillity’.
Spoken language works effectively by exploiting patterns of grammatical variation, such as
those that foreground and emphasise main topics, heighten or tone down degrees of certainty,
and check and monitor how effectively listeners are participating. Writers also make use of
these same features of grammar, but the special quality of writing is seen more typically in its
density of lexical content than in the intricacy of its grammar. For example, in a written
sentence such as ‘Misbalance of functional integration of the immune system was revealed’ the
clause structure is simple, but the tightly packed lexical content gives a sense of complexity to
the sentence. Translating such a sentence into speech would give ‘We saw that there was
something wrong with the balance between various functions of the immune system and the
way these worked together’. At once, we have had to use more clauses to express the meaning,
6
creating a greater grammatical complexity, while at the same time lessening the lexical density
of the written sentence.
Speakers work creatively with the grammar of English all the time to shape ideas, relate to
others and construct different kinds of texts, but there is no Palgrave’s ‘Golden treasury’ of
spoken English. There is no ‘Oxford book’ of good conversations. Compendia and collections
with these kinds of titles are reserved for canonical written texts.
Where can we find ‘spoken texts’ to start the process of selecting and describing the
characteristics of talk? The best resources of spoken language data come from relatively recent
bodies of recorded data – linguistic corpora – held on computers. Major collections of data,
totalling over 400 million words, include the British National Corpus (BNC), Cambridge and
Nottingham Corpus of Discourse of English (CANCODE) and the spoken component of
Collins Birmingham University International Language Database (COBUILD). Analyses of these
resources offer ways of exploring and describing a basic grammar of talk, both in its particular
grammatical properties and in the ways dialogues and conversations are structured. It is in
these jointly constructed spoken texts, rather than in formal spoken presentations or solo
performances, that talk is most distinctive and least like the written mode; this is the source of
our current, developing understandings about the characteristic features of spoken English.
This project mainly involved secondary teachers and their pupils working together on
investigations into the nature of talk. The work they did highlights the following.
■ The importance of increased linguistic awareness of spoken English. The tasks designed by
teachers in the project (to elicit, record or collect samples of naturally occurring talk) show
the value of awareness and reflection by pupils themselves on the nature and purposes of
the talk.
■ Key pedagogical issues. Despite many differences in approach and lesson focus, the teachers’
work was characterised by similar principles. These included explicit teaching about spoken
language, using pupils’ own talk for analysis and a decision to maintain the focus on talk
rather than writing.
■ The significance of work on spoken grammar for all pupils. In particular, for pupils learning
English as an additional language, knowledge of the cluster of grammatical features
highlighted in this publication could significantly enhance their fluency in talk and contribute
to a clearer understanding of how interpersonal relationships are negotiated through talk.
■ Continuities as well as contrasts between spoken and written language. There are a number
of spin-offs from the close focus on some of the grammatical features of talk: in terms of
sharpening pupils’ awareness of why some things work in speech but not in writing and vice
versa; and how writers can use distinctive features of spoken grammar to achieve particular
effects in writing.
7
The grammar of spoken English
Characteristics of spoken language
Some of the grammatical forms and uses of grammar in talk that we need to describe relate
to the way speech is characteristically used. These forms and uses are not haphazard.
Understanding of them can be more effectively incorporated into pupils’ developing
spoken repertoire.
The key characteristics of spoken language are that it:
■ involves speakers and listeners in orienting to context by means of different types
of signalling
■ takes place in a context of real time and space
■ involves face-to-face communication.
These characteristics are described further on the following pages.
Explicit understanding of features of spoken grammar is also helpful in sharpening pupils’
awareness of key differences between talk and writing. In particular, knowledge of how
meanings are created and conveyed in talk reveals that many uses of language (eg how to
organise what is said and to keep listeners on track) cannot simply be carried over into writing.
On the other hand, an exploration of the ways talk is adapted precisely for its purposes is an
important corrective to views that spoken language is inherently sloppy and inferior to writing
– a possible factor in some pupils’ low valuation of talk, and of themselves as speakers.
8
Characteristic 1: signalling the shape and structure of talk
In spoken communication, speakers and listeners constantly signal how they want thingsto be taken and interpreted. This spoken punctuation reflects the need for speakers togive structure and shape to their talk.
Feature Example
9
Where necessary and appropriate,
speakers explicitly signpost things for the
listener, showing how what is being said
relates to what has just been said or to
what is to follow.
We use words such as now and so to
indicate that we are changing from one
topic to another or that we are
concluding a stretch of talk: Now, we
have covered the fifteenth century. Today
we do revision; so, let’s discuss what we
do after two o’clock. In more formal
talk, numerals such as first, second and
third can be used.
Words such as anyway, right, OK and
really can all be highly meaningful as
single speaking turns.
Spoken utterances can be meaningful
when only a single word or phrase
is used.
Speakers commonly avoid elaborating or
over-specifying things and rely on a
mutual understanding of context to
decode meanings.
Spoken utterances can be meaningful
when seemingly half-finished or when
apparently incomplete. Often such
utterances are entirely meaningful in the
context in which they occur, but are not
meaningful outside this context.
Speakers signal less explicitly if what is
referred to can be seen. Words such as
this, that, these, here, now and over
there allow us to show what we are
referring to in ways that would not
normally make sense in writing.
Writing relies much less on immediate
context. Isolated words or phrases can be
used for effect in writing, but in quantity
they are hard work for the reader, whose
expectation is for contexts to be actively
described in a way that enables them to
stand alone.
Characteristic 2: communicating in real time and space
Spoken language is a process of real-time communication. It takes place in real timeand space.
Feature Example
10
Spoken exchanges are typically open and
fluid. Speakers can change direction and
topic, return to things they had
forgotten, insert comments and
anecdotes, and be altogether more
exploratory as the occasion demands
or allows.
Spoken language is mostly unplanned.
Usually it is constructed with little time
for advance planning or editing.
Consequently, much talk has a
temporary, of-the-moment quality.
Changing between topics in writing
needs to be managed carefully to avoid
confusion for the reader. Writers can
take advantage of editing to rearrange
portions of text in the order they want.
Speakers, on the other hand, have less
time but find it much easier to switch
directly between topics. They use
phrases such as: as I was saying earlier,
like you were just saying and to go back
to … again.
Writing usually has a more permanent
character and is often constructed
accordingly. Writers are aware that they
are producing something less ephemeral.
Speakers can switch from one level of
formality to another as the occasion
demands or as they respond to other
speakers. When we write, there is time
to plan and control a particular level
of formality.
Spoken language is relatively varied in
style. Stylistic variation in talk can be
between different accents or dialects as
speakers respond and adapt to the
expectations of different contexts.
Characteristic 3: communicating face to face
Spoken language is normally a process of face-to-face communication. We are alert tofeedback and constantly adjust what we say in the light of an ongoing situation.
Feature Example
11
Speaking is essentially a collaborative
and interactive process. It works as a
dialogue between two or more people in
which meanings are made mutually.
Although people do make speeches,
tell long solo narratives and sustain
monologues, spoken language exists
primarily to be exchanged with listeners.
We may finish each other’s comments,
interrupt, compete to take a turn, argue,
disagree with or extend what is said.
Some talk takes place with speakers
speaking at the same time.
Feedback words and phrases include
exactly, definitely, right, absolutely,
good, oh I see and that’s interesting.
Simple vocalisations given in feedback to
another speaker include yeah, mmm, uh
huh and oh. Non-verbal feedback could
be a nod of the head.
Speakers also give feedback to each other
as they talk and listen. Sometimes this
feedback involves specific words or it
may involve no more than vocalisations.
It may even be non-verbal.
Speakers use eye contact, gestures, body
language and movements, intonation and
volume, pauses and silences to convey
meaning. Not replying to someone or
remaining silent in a discussion can be
construed as subversive.
Speakers use more than words. Non-
verbal communication supplements and
sometimes subverts verbal
communication.
Spoken language is full of expressions,
above and beyond the modal verbs,
which help speakers negotiate and adapt
the forcefulness or certainty of what they
are saying, depending on the responses of
their listeners. This is one of the ways
speakers adjust their points of view and
develop meanings together.
Modal expressions such as possibly,
probably, maybe, I guess, I suppose and
perhaps help us to negotiate what we
mean in an essentially non-assertive way.
Written language is relatively sparse in
ways of indicating that there is more to a
message than what the words alone
denote, or that words are not intended to
be taken at their face value.
Although we can use capital letters,
italics and underlining to emphasise
things, dots to indicate silence and
exclamation marks to indicate the pitch
of the voice, none of them can capture
the precise nature of spoken utterances.
A sample stretch of talk: a grammatical perspective
We have discussed some of the things we know about spoken language in general and some of
the ways in which spoken language is distinctive as a mode of communication, especially when
compared to written language. Now, with a focus on grammar, we look closely at an actual
transcript of a stretch of talk.
When we do so, perhaps the most marked problem we encounter is the frequent occurrence
of units that do not conform to the well-formed ‘sentences’ that are often used to illustrate
common patterns of language in traditional grammars. The following extract shows some of
these and other units frequently encountered in a spoken corpus. Problematic areas for a
traditional grammar are in italic.
The following is an extract from a transcript of a group talking about a car accident that
happened to the father of one of the speakers. The conversation takes place at the dinner table.
Notice how difficult it is to ‘read’ a transcript. Speaking turns change rapidly and we do not
have ‘local knowledge’, such as knowing the people involved or the context. We do not have
visual clues, gestures or tones of voice to give us extra help in working out what is going on.
12
These are structures that
are difficult to define.
The word ‘like’ appears
to function as a marker of
direct speech.
These are words that have
more than one grammatical
class. For example, ‘now’ is
normally an adverb. Here it
seems to be organisational or
structural, functioning to
close down one section of the
conversation and to move on
to another topic. Such
discourse markers connect
one phase of the talk
with another.
These are phrasal utterances,
communicatively complete in
themselves, that are not
sentences.
These are ‘subordinate’
clauses not obviously
connected to any particular
main clause.
Ellipsis is common. Ellipsis
occurs when words are
omitted because it is assumed
that they can be understood
from context or from shared
knowledge between speaker
and hearer.
Speaker
2 I think your dad was amazed wasn’t he at the damage?
4 Mm.
2 It’s not so much the parts. It’s the labour charges for
4 Oh that. For a car.
2 Have you got hold of it?
1 Yeah.
2 It was a bit erm.
1 Mm.
3 Mm.
2 A bit.
3 That’s right.
2 I mean they said they’d have to take his car in for
two days. And he says All it is s= straightening a
panel. And they’re like, Oh no. It’s all new panel.
You can’t do this.
3 Any erm problem.
2 As soon as they hear insurance claim. Oh. Let’s get it right.
3 Yeah. Yeah. Anything to do with
1 Wow.
3 Coach work is er
1 Right.
3 Fatal isn’t it.
1 Now.
This extract illustrates details of the use of grammar, showing clearly that the notion of a
sentence does not apply easily to spoken language. While the conversation shows that speakers
do use some conventionally formed sentences, these exist side-by-side with forms that cannot be
described in this way. However, to call either of them well-formed or ill-formed, complete or
incomplete does justice neither to their social appropriateness and acceptability, nor to the
success of speakers in using them.
This conversational extract involves more than one speaker, but the same features of
conversational management apply whether the talk is multi-party or two-party. In this extract
we can observe the following specific features that we have already described in general terms.
■ Punctuation is marked by the taking of turns rather than by a transition from one sentence to
another. These turns are not neat and tidy, however. The speakers regularly interrupt each
other, or speak at the same time, intervene in one another’s contribution or overlap in their
speaking turns.
■ The speakers co-construct each other’s discourse. There is backchannelling (eg Mm and
Yeah), whereby speakers give supportive feedback to each other. The speakers also support
each other in making meanings.
■ Some structures are started, but then not finished (eg It was a bit erm and A bit). Sometimes
there is no need to ‘complete’ them because they are completed by others or are simply
understood. This is the case when Speaker 3 responds to an incomplete utterance with the
phrase That’s right.
■ Spoken communication takes place in real time. There are pauses, rephrasings, hesitations,
false starts and revisions because we often do not have time to edit and shape what we say.
■ Speakers are also sensitive to their listeners and construct what they say so that they can be
understood easily. Listeners often have difficulty processing real-time spoken communication
and speakers know this.
■ In addition, speakers use more than words to convey meaning. They also say what they want
to say by means of the pitch and tone of the voice, by eye contact, by gestures, movements
and body language and sometimes by significant pauses or silence. Inevitably this is not
captured in a transcript.
The phenomena highlighted in the transcript are normal in everyday talk. Our stance towards
such talk and the forms of language that make it up can have major implications for what is
considered correct or acceptable in a grammar. Not only does the presence of some forms of
spoken English cause difficulties for our traditional descriptions of English grammar, it also
leads to questions about what it is now possible to call ‘standard’ English.
However, evidence from multimillion word corpora of spoken English1 shows that such forms
are standard in so far as they are used by all speakers, even though (for the reasons given
above) these same forms do not appear – or appear only very rarely – in ‘standard’ published
grammars of English, and feature equally rarely in many formal uses of writing.
The spoken examples collected in these corpora are obtained in naturally occurring everyday
contexts of use, such as service encounters, workplace exchanges and family conversations,
often involving personal exchanges and narratives. People recorded in modern British corpora
come from different regions of the country and careful preparation ensures a balance between
the gender, age and social class of the speakers. The data collected on tape is then transcribed
13
1 Major collections of data include: the BNC, which now totals 10 million words of spoken British English;the 5 million-word CANCODE corpus held at Nottingham University; the spoken component of the400 million-word COBUILD corpus held at the University of Birmingham.
and made computer-readable, so that very fast and sophisticated computer programs can
identify frequent or salient structures alongside the contexts in which they are used.
The corpora clearly show that features such as different forms of ellipsis, phrasal utterances,
subordinate clauses that stand alone, and words whose grammatical class changes to serve
different purposes, are random neither in frequency nor in function. Such features are widely
used and, in combination, enable speakers to organise their thoughts, to respond to the
pressures of communicating in real time and to link what they say to shared contexts.
Dialects of spoken English
The description of some important grammatical characteristics of spoken English is not related
to discussions about ‘non-standard’ or ‘standard’ spoken English. The national curriculum
requirements for teaching standard spoken English refer specifically to a set of non-standard
usages in England:
■ subject–verb agreement (they was)
■ formation of past tense (have fell and I done)
■ formation of negatives (ain’t)
■ formation of adverbs (come quick)
■ use of demonstrative pronouns (them books)
■ use of pronouns (me and him went)
■ use of prepositions (out the door).
These features are described as non-standard because they are found in regional dialects of
English. Of course, any or all of them may occur in instances of spoken language, where
acceptance of their use will often be a matter of judgement based on the context of the talk and
who the participants are, for example whether speakers are the of the same age, status, class or
gender. The judgement about acceptability is more absolute in written language: in most kinds
of formal, non-fictional texts destined for public readership, the occurrence of these dialectal
features is not considered correct. Teaching about the reasons for using standard forms of the
grammar in most kinds of writing and in certain occasions of speaking may be done in parallel
with teaching about the core features of spoken English, but it is a slightly different agenda.
14
Some core grammatical features of spoken English
Some of the core grammatical features of spoken English (for example, ellipsis) share a
grammatical label with similar features of written language. Some of the other features (for
example, heads and tails and discourse markers), however, exist on the boundaries of what is
conventionally understood as a grammar of sentences, and these have different labels. Both
vague language and modal expressions directly involve lexical and pragmatic features as well as
grammatical features. The terminology used throughout this publication recognises this new
territory and tries to capture something of the distinctive features of the grammar of speech.
We now explain these distinctive features in detail, using examples from different corpora of
spoken English. The headings under which they are grouped indicate the ways in which aspects
of spoken grammar work together to realise the functions associated with talk.
Signalling the shape and structure of talk: discourse markers andheads and tails
Although when we speak there are no full stops or commas or colons, we do need a kind of
spoken punctuation. This helps us to organise what we say, to signpost for others what is
coming up and to place what has just been said so that the listener knows how to take it. In
general, signalling is a vital component of interactive communication, linking, highlighting and
re-emphasising stretches of talk for our own benefit and the benefit of the listener. Features of
spoken grammar that are particularly associated with signalling are discourse markers and
heads and tails.
15
Discourse markers
Discourse markers are the individual words and phrases that are used to mark
boundaries in conversation between one topic or bit of business and the next (eg anyway,
right, okay, I see, I mean, mind you, well, right, what’s more, so and now).
They often have ‘pragmatic’ meanings different from their dictionary meanings. Thus, in
actual dialogue now or right do not mean at this moment or correct, respectively. Now
signals a change in topic or a return to an earlier topic. Right indicates that speakers need
to make a decision or that a decision has been accepted or has at least been
acknowledged.
Anyway, give Jean a ring and see what she says.
Right, okay, we’d better try to phone and see what they have to report.
Discourse markers signpost and signal interactively how a speaker plans to organise a
dialogue. Thus, people speaking face to face or on the phone often use anyway to show
that they wish to finish that particular topic or return to another topic. Similarly, so can
indicate that a speaker is summing up, while okay often serves to indicate that a speaker
is ready to move on to the next phase of business; or it can signal that a speaker is
checking that the listener approves what is being done.
A: Mm. So did you feel that the points that you made in your original letter were
all covered in this reply?
B: Oh yes. I think they’ve answered me very well indeed.
Discourse markers can have more than one
function. For example, the main function of
well as a discourse marker is to indicate that
the speaker is thinking about things and it can
be used to indicate that what has just been said
needs to be modified or qualified.
A: What do you think we should do
about it?
B: Well, I’m going to think about it. I don’t
know at the moment.
Well is also used to indicate that the speaker is saying something that contrasts with what
has just been said. In addition, it can be used to signal the end of an exchange.
Well, that’s all for now. We’ll see you again at the same time next week.
16
Heads and tails
These are words and phrases placed at the start or finish of utterances in ways that help
the listener to orient to the topic or remember what has been said.
A head involves a noun or noun phrase placed strategically at the beginning of a clause
which is then followed by a subsequent pronoun to ensure that the listener follows the
reference.
The white house on the corner, is that where she lives?
That book over there, the one with the red cover, that’s it, can you pass itover here?
That girl, Jill, her sister, she works in our office.
Paul, in this job that he’s got now, when he goes into the office he’s never quite
sure where he’s going to be sent.
A friend of mine, his uncle had the taxi firm when we had the wedding.
His cousin in Beccles, her boyfriend, his parents bought him a Ford Escort for his
birthday.
Tails occur at the end of clauses, normally echoing an antecedent pronoun. They help to
reinforce what is said, adding emphasis and ensuring that the listener does not lose
reference to the original topic.
She’s a very good swimmer Jenny is.
It’s difficult to eat, isn’t it, spaghetti?
I’m going to have steak and fries, I am.
It can leave you feeling very weak, it can, though, apparently, shingles, can’t it?
17
Communicating in real time and space: deixis, ellipsis and spokenclause structure
Talk is immediate and spontaneous. When we write we can take time to revise, edit and re-edit
our message. Writing promotes repeated rereading and analysis, fostering messages that are
normally carefully shaped. The speed at which we speak also means that we communicate with
each other in a transient, time-bound way. Features of spoken grammar that are particularly
associated with communicating in real time and space are deixis, ellipsis and clause structure.
Deixis
Deixis describes the ‘orientational’ features of language, including words and phrases
which point directly to particular features of the immediate situation. It occurs in both
written and spoken language, but is more common in spoken English where it can be
used to locate an utterance spatially. In writing, deictic expressions often lead to
ambiguities because we cannot see or identify easily what is being referred to. Common
examples in spoken English are the words this, these, that, those, here and there.
Deictic words are especially common in situations where speakers are doing something
together and everyone can see what is going on.
Could we just move that into this corner here?
Temporal deictic words such as now and personal pronouns such as I and we are also
common. They indicate the extent to which a speaker is close to or involved with
something at the moment of utterance. They refer to who is speaking and who is
included or excluded from the message, orientating the listener interpersonally and in
time and space.
Then I’d like to pop in to that little shop
over there.
Looks like that’s the right one for them.
Deictic words are likely to occur with
ellipsis. Both features assume shared
knowledge and that the speakers occupy the
same common ground, having the same
understandings about the time and space
referred to.
Message left on an answerphone:
I’m phoning up about this trying to set up a meeting and various other things Ibelieve. Erm there’s a staff meeting at two on Friday twenty-fourth. And I was
thinking perhaps we could meet in the morning beforehand if you’re going to be
free that day. Anyway er give me a ring. I’m around tomorrow. Though
tomorrow afternoon I’m not about because I’ve got an appointment at thehospital. Don’t know how long I’ll be there. But I’m here tomorrow morningFriday so ring.
18
Ellipsis
Ellipsis occurs when subjects and verbs are omitted. It happens when speakers can
assume that listeners know enough about people and things in the immediate situation
to be able to supply ‘missing’ information. In written English, ellipsis is mainly textual.
That is, it normally involves the omission of a word where it is obvious what is being
referred to, for example the repeated pronoun she in She went to the party and (she)
danced all night. Ellipsis in spoken English is, however, mainly situational, affecting
people and things in the immediate situation.
Didn’t know that film was on tonight. [I]Sounds good to me. [It, That]Lots of things to tell you about the trip to Barcelona. [There are]
A: Are you going to Leeds this weekend?
B: Yes, I must. [go to Leeds this weekend]
A: What’s the matter?
B: Got an awful cold. [I’ve got]A: Just seen Paul. [I’ve just]B: Did he say anything?
A: Nothing.
B: Interesting, isn’t it? [It is interesting] (from Carter and McCarthy, 1997)
In these examples the words omitted do not cause any ambiguity or create a lack of
clarity. It is obvious who is speaking or what is being referred to.
Ellipsis enables efficient, clear communication. Speakers are highly sensitive to their
listeners and skilled in deciding just how much it is necessary to include in the message
for the listener.
Although ellipsis is often defined as the absence of elements normally required by the
grammar (eg a subject before a finite verb), in reality nothing is ‘missing’ from elliptical
messages; they contain enough for the purposes of communication. Conversely, formal
speech and writing typically need to elaborate more, for the sake of readers/listeners,
and so ‘add’ items that might otherwise be unnecessary in everyday informal speech.
19
Spoken clause structure
The spontaneous nature of spoken English, with only limited planning and thinking
time, is particularly marked in clause structure, where one clause is added to another in
a linear and incremental way.
Sure we got there um at seven actually around six fifteen and class starts at seven
and I went up in this building that was about five or six stories high and I was
the only one there and I was the only one there I was. And I yeah I was thinking
gosh you know is this the right place or maybe everyone’s inside waiting for me
to come in there’s nothing said you know come on in knock on the door and
come in or anything like that.
Speakers do not normally have time to construct elaborate patterns of main and
subordinate clauses. Much more common are chains of clauses linked by coordinating
conjunctions (eg and) or by simple subordinating conjunctions (eg cos or so). In talk,
these conjunctions often function in a dynamic and listener-sensitive way to coordinate
rather than subordinate information. For example:
[The speaker is describing a motor accident in which she was involved] I was
driving along talking to Jill and we’d, like, stopped at some traffic lights and then
– bang – there was this almighty crash and we got pushed forward all of a
sudden.
When they do occur, subordinate clauses commonly stand alone and highlight or
reinforce a topic.
I can’t angle it to shine on the music stand, and the bulb’s gone, whichdoesn’t help.
They can also serve as a signal that another speaker may want to take a turn, keeping a
dialogue ‘open’. Such clauses often occur after a pause, or after feedback from a listener
or to elaborate on what someone has just said. The clauses also comment on what has
been said, often introducing an evaluative (positive or negative) viewpoint.
A: Well actually one person has applied.
B: Mm.
A: Which is great. [reinforces the topic]
B: Though it’s all relative, of course. [evaluates comment]
20
Communicating face to face: vague language, modal expressionsand adverbs
It is very unusual to communicate with someone in writing when we can see them. School
pupils do this when they do not want to be heard or if they wish to exclude someone present.
With one or two exceptions, such as telephone calls, spoken language involves face-to-face
communication. When we can see someone’s reaction, we are likely to be more sensitive and to
qualify what we say. Features of spoken grammar that are particularly associated with
communicating face to face are vague language, modal expressions and adverbs.
Vague language
Vague language is lexical as well as grammatical. When we think of vague language, we
think of individual ‘general’ lexical terms (eg thing, stuff and whatever) as well as high-
frequency verbs (make, do, get and take) and basic adjectives and adverbs (eg nice,
good, terrible, usually, totally and hopefully). However, vague language also involves
grammatical forms, especially when these general words link with other words to form
phrases or when they are used grammatically to modify nouns.
Between then and like nineteen eighty four I just spent the whole time, I mean
for that whole sort of twelve-year period or whatever, erm I was just working
with just lots and lots and lots of different people.
When we interact with others, there are times when it is necessary to give accurate and
precise information. In informal contexts, however, speakers may prefer to convey
information that is softened in some way. Vague language is used to mark friendliness or
to avoid sounding over-assertive or too elaborate, although such vagueness is often
wrongly taken as a sign of careless thinking or sloppy expression. So a more accurate
term would be ‘purposefully vague language’, for example I’ve got coursework and stuffto finish.
Vague language is commonly used for number approximations (eg lots of, round about,
or so and or thereabouts).
There were sixty or so people there.
We’ll see you at seven or thereabouts.
It can be used when listeners know what is being referred to and share the same
common ground, and when to say more would be over-elaborate and unnecessary.
A: She doesn’t like coffee.
B: Well, she can have a coke or something.
21
Modal expressions
In most standard written grammars of English, modality is described mainly in terms of
modal verbs (eg may, might, can, could, must, should and ought to). In spoken face-to-
face communication, however, the picture is more varied and modal expressions
regularly play a part in making sure that utterances do not sound too assertive or
definite. Like ‘vague language’, modal expressions (eg possibly, probably, I don’t know,
I don’t think, I think, I suppose and perhaps) help to hedge and soften what is said.
[Students talking to each other in a group. They all know each other well and are
talking informally about how they have changed after the first year in college]
A: But you don’t notice so much in yourself, do you? I don’t think so, on thewhole.B: I don’t know. I definitely feel different from the first year. I don’t think I look
any different or anything.
A: You’re bound to keep changing really, all your whole life, hopefully.
B: I don’t know, I think it’s probably a change coming away, I suppose.
Modal expressions make it possible for the speaker to shift their stance towards a
subject as they speak, becoming more or less tentative, positive or definite, depending on
the listener’s response.
I suppose it must be sort of difficult to phone or whatever.I feel they maybe should resign really.We maybe ought to perhaps have a word with him about it?
22
Links between the grammatical features
Individual forms of spoken grammar do not normally operate in isolation from each other.
Although we have discussed spoken clause structure and deixis under one heading and vague
language under another, they clearly combine to convey the ebb and flow of interactive speech.
For example, a speaker may simultaneously not wish to be assertive and direct (and so soften
what they are saying); be struggling with the demands of real-time communication; and wish to
point out something to someone who can see what is being referred to.
These forms of grammar, though common in spoken English, are not exclusive to spoken
English. While there are systematic differences between spoken and written English, they are
both varieties of the same language. We need to understand what links them in order to be able
to compare them and to show the influence of one mode on the other. For example, the
immediacy of forms such as email communication, advertising copy, and some notes, letters and
memos means that speech-like informality is often the preferred style. Such choices deliberately
construct a relationship of equality between writer and reader. We illustrate some of these
features of writing more fully in the section on approaches to spoken English in the classroom,
see pages 53–59.
In the following section we look at ways in which the characteristic grammatical features
can be investigated in classrooms and how awareness of these forms can stimulate
classroom activities.
Adverbs
In casual conversation in English, adverbs are usually added after the main content of
the message has been communicated. This positioning is more flexible than in written
language, and is brought about by the demands of real-time and face-to-face
communication. Adverbs and adverbial phrases are commonly used to qualify, hedge or
modify what is said. When writing, there is time to plan ahead and to organise these
qualifications; when speaking, there are different constraints. For example, adverbials
may occur after question tags (eg isn’t it? and shouldn’t it?), or at the end of clauses in
ways that would not be acceptable in written texts.
Spanish is more widely used isn’t it outside of Europe?
I was worried I was going to lose it and I did almost.You know which one I mean probably.
It’s a bit panicky, but I’ve not got any deadlines like you have though.
It should be a lot easier playing Poland after Germany, shouldn’t it, in a way?
The ordering of elements in the clause is also likely to be different because of the need in
speech to simultaneously orientate the listener to the topic and, as here, to soften,
qualify or emphasise what has been said.
23
Foregrounding spoken English:classroom investigations
This section contains illustrations of work from classroom investigations. Teachers and pupils
explored the following six grammatical features of spoken grammar (selected from those
discussed in section 3):
■ discourse markers
■ deixis
■ ellipsis
■ spoken clause structure
■ purposefully vague language
■ modal expressions.
The examples illuminate the core functions of:
■ signalling the shape and structure of talk
■ communicating in real time and space
■ communicating face to face.
Of course, a focus on one aspect of spoken grammar does not mean that investigations did not
consider other features of spoken grammar in particular or spoken language in general.
Many of the teachers’ comments show that the work engaged with more than one aspect of
spoken grammar, especially when pupils studied transcripts of talk.
The form of the investigations is:
■ aims – a brief overview of what the teachers hoped to achieve through teaching the
particular aspect of spoken grammar
■ context – information on the school and the particular class that undertook the work
■ lesson planning – the number and sequence of lessons, the stages within them and how they
fitted into existing teaching plans.
The teachers’ observations consider:
■ findings about spoken language – language data emerging from the investigations, sometimes
in the form of recordings or brief notes of what pupils said
■ outcomes – initial conclusions about the study of spoken grammar and implications for
future work.
24
Great Britons
Year 10: discourse markers
Ways of marking boundaries between parts of an utterance
Aims
■ to raise awareness of spoken English
■ to encourage recognition of discourse markers in spoken English
■ to explore how discourse markers work interpersonally to punctuate or ‘oil the wheels’ of
talk, for example to encourage or discourage, exemplify, affirm, invite turn-taking, set and
structure agendas and check understanding.
Context
The school is an 11–18 mixed comprehensive in Gloucestershire, with approximately 1,750
students. In 2002, 71 per cent of pupils achieved five or more GCSEs at grades A*–C.
The year 10 class consists of 30 pupils who achieved levels 4–7 at key stage 3, working towards
grades A*–C at GCSE English and English Literature.
Lesson planning
This was planned as a short, discrete investigation related to a whole-school competition
entitled ‘Who’s the greatest?’. It took place over three lessons. The work was mainly oral,
supported by handouts for discussion and copies of short transcripts from classroom
interaction. The final lesson required pupils to write about their investigation of talk,
finding examples to support their analysis of discourse markers.
Lesson 1
The overall project was briefly described to pupils and the specific focus of the investigation
(discourse markers) was explained.
A quick, whole-class session (10 minutes) generated criteria about what makes a good
discussion.
Pupils worked in groups of about five to discuss the question ‘What makes a great person?’,
followed by feedback to the whole class.
25
Classro
om
investig
ation
:d
iscou
rse markers
Great Britons
In a recent BBC TV programme, Great Britons, various celebrities were invited to argue the case
for the person whom they considered to be the greatest Briton of all time. Having heard the
arguments, the public were then able to vote. Winston Churchill was finally declared the winner,
with Isambard Kingdom Brunel second, and Princess Diana third.
Complete the following tasks to decide who our ‘Great Briton’ is.
■ Decide on what makes someone ‘great’. Make a list of five criteria that someone must fulfil in
order to be considered ‘great’.
■ Using your greatness criteria, put the following 15 Britons into descending rank order
(1 = greatest) according to how great you think they are. Be prepared to argue your case
to the class.
Person Rank (1–15)
Bobby Moore
Florence Nightingale
Sir Isaac Newton
John Lennon
Charles Darwin
Robbie Williams
Ian Botham
Oliver Cromwell
Isambard Kingdom Brunel
Margaret Thatcher
Winston Churchill
William Shakespeare
Princess Diana
Emmeline Pankhurst
William Caxton
Using these criteria, pupils then discussed ‘Who is the greatest Briton of all time?’ (see
handout 1 for lesson 1) by ranking candidates in descending order of greatness. Pupils
attempted to reach a consensus of opinion (20 minutes). Some discussions were recorded
for later transcription by the teacher for use in lesson 2.
A spokesperson from each group gave feedback to the whole class.
Lesson 1 handout
26
Classro
om
investig
ation
:d
iscou
rse markers
27
Transcript of a group discussion (excerpt)
Speaker
A Right, what do you mean by equal society?
B Equal minded.
A Equal minded…mmm…what does that mean?
B Like, non-biased I put.
C Non-biased means what?
A No. I don’t really understand what you mean.
B Like, equal minded means they’re not on any side, they’re, like, equal.
D Yeah, like fair.
C Yeah, but sides in what though?
B Like, no, like some kind of person. Oh yeah, it’s like fair treatment of everybody. That’s what
I kind of mean, you know?
D Like one of them suffragette sort of people. Whatever, you know?
Lesson 2
Pupils were presented with a transcript of discussion from one group (see handout 1 for
lesson 2) and were asked the following questions about it.
■ How does the transcript differ from what was expected?
■ Is this a ‘good’ small group discussion according to the criteria defined in lesson 1?
■ Can you identify any words or phrases in the discussion that do not seem to carry
information or add to the discussion in any obvious way (ie discourse markers)?
Following feedback to the whole class, discourse markers were explained using a handout
(see handout 2 for lesson 2).
Pupils then annotated examples of discourse markers on the transcript and discussed their
function. An overhead transparency (OHT) was used to summarise observations of the whole
annotations. The class went on to discuss what additional information might be needed to
make sense of the transcript and the discourse markers, for example non-verbal language and
intonation.
Lesson 2, handout 1
Classro
om
investig
ation
:d
iscou
rse markers
28
Discourse markers
Discourse markers are words or phrases that are used to mark boundaries in conversation between one
topic or bit of business and another. For example, right, OK, I see, I mean, whatever, well and know
what I mean? help speakers to work their way through conversation, indicating whether they want to
open or close a topic or to continue it, whether they agree with what’s being said and to encourage
people to continue or to stop speaking.
In telephone conversations, for instance, the words right and anyway usually show that the speaker
wishes the current bit of conversation or even the whole call to come to an end. Look at this example.
Speaker
A I told her that I couldn’t come.
B Yeah…anyway.
A She knows it’s Thursday…I keep…er…saying.
B Right…anyway.
A Well.
B OK. Right. OK. Bye then.
A Bye.
It’s clear in this conversation that Speaker B wants to conclude the discussion, although it takes A
some time to realise it!
Look carefully at your transcript of the ‘Great Britons’ discussion. Highlight any examples of discourse
markers and decide what function they serve in the discussion. Be prepared to feed back your ideas to
the whole class.
Lesson 2, handout 2
Lesson 3
After a recap of the previous lesson’s work, pupils were asked to write about their investigation
and focus on the following questions.
■ What are ‘discourse markers’?
■ What functions can they serve in discussion?
■ How could knowing about them improve the quality of small group discussion?
Pupils were asked to support their answers with quotations from the transcript.
Classro
om
investig
ation
:d
iscou
rse markers
Teacher’s observations
Findings about spoken language
The pupils were very responsive and reported that they enjoyed the work. The ‘Who’s the greatest?’ discussion
stimulated lively and interesting debate, with pupils holding some trenchant views, which they defended
enthusiastically. More revealing in the context of this investigation were pupils’ observations about what makes a
good discussion. Typical comments included no hesitations, no long pauses, fluent and clear. When I presented
the class with the transcript (handout 1 for lesson 2), the initial feeling among many pupils, including those who
had participated in the discussion, was that it was an example of inferior talk.
However, after I had introduced the pupils to the notion of discourse markers, their response to the transcript
became more perceptive and, in some cases, more sympathetic towards the speakers. Typical responses included
an observation in written work that: Speaker B is trying to explain what she means by ‘equal minded’ but she is
not too sure what it means herself, so, to give herself extra time to think, she says ‘like’ at the start of her
sentence. Another pupil suggested: When the speaker says ‘you know?’ she is actually wanting the others to agree
with her or to start speaking. Another comment was that: Speaker B usually says ‘like’ when she wants to explain
something or answer a question with an example [of] what she means. Finally, one pupil argued: ‘like’ shows that
the speaker isn’t sure and doesn’t want to be really certain in case it’s wrong.
The challenge for these pupils was to understand how the effective use of discourse markers contributed to
successful speech in ways that differed from the pattern of writing. Their aim was to ‘improve our speaking and
listening techniques in that speech will be on-going without pauses or ums and will flow smoothly’. It seemed to
me important that they did more work on other features of spoken grammar, such as deixis and vague language,
in order to see more clearly the way such features in combination shape and structure conversation, and play a
part in keeping the topics moving.
As anticipated, the work did raise the profile of spoken English. Before the class many pupils seemed to view
speech as an aberrant form of writing, suggesting, perhaps, that talk in our classrooms is undervalued in
comparison with the other attainment targets. Views about how talk was structured were changed.
Pupils learned that discourse marking is important in discussion, especially for inviting others’ contributions,
signalling, turn-taking and organising what is said. They recognised the functions and potential usefulness to
discussion of discourse markers (rather than regarding them as simply sloppy talk) and recognised that they can
employ them to ‘initiate and sustain’ (GCSE speaking and listening marking criterion).
Outcomes
■ It occurred to me that of all the forms of spoken grammar being explored as part of the project, discourse
markers were perhaps the most ‘straightforward’. As such, would they make a good starting point for a
scheme of work about spoken English and grammar?
■ Although pupils enjoyed the idea of being part of a research project, there was a sense among some of why
are we doing this now? (we had just finished reading The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes). These activities
would fit into the curriculum more naturally elsewhere, perhaps as part of a discrete scheme of work on
spoken English.
■ There needs to be planning for more coverage of the distinctive features of spoken English. Pupils are quite
familiar from the national strategy and the writing triplets at GCSE with the idea that different text types
have different grammatical conventions, but are less comfortable with the notion that the same could apply
to speech.
■ Schemes of work might need to be revised (particularly in view of the above) in order to integrate speaking
and listening objectives and/or the specific speaking and listening units of work that were devised.
■ Pupils need to see good models of talk for a range of purposes and audiences.
29
Classro
om
investig
ation
:d
iscou
rse markers
Tying knots
Year 7: deixis
The words and phrases that are used to point to features in the immediate situation and to locate an utterance spatially
Aims
■ to increase pupils’ awareness of speech, and of deixis in particular
■ to explore how deixis in speech is different from deixis in writing.
Pupils investigated instructional language in both spoken and written form. The initial focus on
deictic speech allowed pupils to consider why effective uses of deixis in oral communication
might create ambiguities in written language. Pupils also had the opportunity to analyse their
own speech and to develop awareness of spoken discourse structure.
Context
The year 7 class of pupils of above-average ability were at a very large comprehensive school in
Essex. The class contained 10 girls and 18 boys. The average national curriculum level of pupils
in the class was 4/+.
Lesson planning
The work related to year 7 teaching objectives from the key stage 3 Framework for teaching
English:
■ investigate the differences between spoken and written language structures (sentence level 15)
■ revise the stylistic conventions of non-fiction, write instructions which are helpfully
sequenced and signposted (sentence level 13d).
The first lesson involved a video-recording of dialogues between groups of pupils in which they
attempted to instruct a partner in the particular task of tying a knot. In a connected homework
task the pupils produced written instructions. The second and third lessons planned to use the
products of the homework exercise to compare the uses of deixis in speech and writing.
30
Classro
om
investig
ation
:d
eixis
Lesson 1
A number of pupils were asked to teach a partner how to tie a particular knot, using either
string or a tie. The volunteers were filmed using a video camera, ensuring that pupils would
have the opportunity to note body language – gestures and facial expressions – as well as
features of talk and delivery.
Twelve groups of pupils were filmed. The length of the entire film was 9 minutes 30 seconds.
The class watched the videotape three times. On each occasion they were asked to focus on a
different aspect of the speech used. On the first viewing, pupils were asked to watch the
12 examples and rank them in order of effective instruction. They were very excited to see
themselves on film and, at the first viewing, their focus was less directed on communication.
They were, however, able to provide justification for their choices for which groups were more
effective in communicating. For the second viewing, pupils were asked to note specific
mannerisms and behaviour used by those speakers in the more successful groups. On the third
viewing, pupils were asked to focus on the type of language that had been used during the
instruction. They were asked to note words or phrases that were used regularly or repeated
frequently in the interactions.
A homework task was set to produce a set of written instructions on how to make a cup of tea.
Prior to writing the instructions, the class agreed that the following details should be included:
ingredients, equipment, steps necessary and a formal style. No other framework or structure was
provided. These instructions were to be used to compare to the spoken instructions they had
viewed on the video (which were made into a simple transcript by the teacher between lessons).
Lesson 2
Pupils read out their instructions on how to make a cup of tea and peers commented on
effective phrases and how instructions could be improved. They wanted instructions to be clear,
well organised, sufficiently detailed and easy to understand. Pupils were asked to predict how
they thought spoken language in the video would be different from their written instructions.
Lesson 3
Pupils were given seven simple transcripts of the video examples that they identified as being
successful. Transcripts were relatively basic due to time constraints and only included words
spoken and general indication of pauses (the more dots, the longer the pause).
The following examples are transcripts of conversations between pupils that were recorded and
used as a basis for further analysis of deixis.
31
Classro
om
investig
ation
:d
eixis
32
Pupils studied the transcripts in pairs and commented on the language used. They considered
the following questions.
■ How is the language in the transcripts different from what you expected?
■ How is the speech different from writing?
■ Why is the speech different from writing? Try to pick out specific examples.
■ What words are used most frequently in the speech?
■ What are the benefits of spoken instructions?
Answers were discussed by the class as a whole. The discussion raised issues about the
difference between speech and writing as forms of communication. There was also some debate
as to the benefits and limitations of each form of language.
Pupils were provided with some examples of written instructions. Written instructions included
a guide on how to use a computer program, a guide on using a palmtop computer and a book
on how to make a variety of complex knots (one set of instructions included written prompts,
the other contained only images). Pupils were asked to complete the following tasks.
■ In pairs, rank the written instructions. Decide which one is the best and which one is
the worst.
■ Why is the best set of instructions so good? Give examples.
■ Why is the worst set of instructions so bad? Give examples.
■ How are these instructions similar or different to the spoken instructions we heard on
the video?
Views were then shared in class. Pupils were asked to draw instructions on how to make a cup
of tea without using written language. They compared their image instructions with their
written instructions.
Pair 1
N You go in a circle like that........then you put that bit through like that........and then you…go
through like that........and then you pull.
R Is that it?
N Yeah.
R Undo the knot....Is that it?
Pair 2
C That one?
R And then make a loop like that…and then just twist it round so it’s…
C Twist it?
R So it’s like crossed....there.
C Like that?
R Yeah that’s it…Then make it smaller by pulling the string..by putting your fingers like
that......and then do another loop through.
C What?
R No.
C How you supposed to?
R You make a loop....Do a loop..and then it’s free....and then just pull it....and then just put that
bit through.
C What…like that?
R And then put your fingers out…pull it.....it comes undone.
Classro
om
investig
ation
:d
eixis
Teacher’s observations
Findings about spoken language
Pupils were highly motivated by this approach and enjoyed being a classroom resource. After the initial pair of
pupils were filmed, the other pupils began to relax as they were filmed. Following the first viewing of the video,
the class made the following comments about the groups they identified as being the most effective:
They talked between themselves ; They were talking to each other well’; They talked a lot. C— was asking a
lot of questions ; They had a conversation and could see how the knot was being done; and L— was speaking
clearly…step by step…waited until S— had finished and went onto the next step.
Following the second viewing, pupils noted that gestures were very important: for example pointing, facial
expressions, keeping the conversation going, eye contact, giving time to complete the action and modelling what
had to be done.
During the third viewing, pupils noted the following words or phrases which they thought were regularly
repeated:
– right – left – through – wrap round – now you
– loop – go over – under – big bit – you go
– small bit – like this – like that – yeah
– then – pull – huh – what
The pupils produced effective written instructions on how to make a cup of tea. They all chose to follow the
basic framework they identified in the lesson, namely a step-by-step approach. Pupils chose to use full sentences
or bullet points. All chose to use imperatives at the beginning of the sentence or phrase. We discussed why
imperatives had been so important when writing instructions. They felt each other’s instructions were clear and,
on the whole, served their purpose. Pupils thought that the written instructions were good because they had had
the time to plan what they wanted to say and to consider the order of the points they made, and the words they
wanted to use.
Pupils were very surprised by the transcripts of their conversations on the video. They said: The language in the
transcripts is different from what I expected because I expected that they would make sense and that more had
been said. I never thought people repeated themselves so much. When people are asked questions they don’t
always answer because they probably nodded ; I expected people to speak in full sentences, instead they use a lot
of short phrases. On the video you understand what they are saying and doing, but on paper it’s not so clear;
I thought I said much more. I didn’t answer E—’s questions, I think I nodded; and The language was not very
formal and they did not speak in full sentences. What they said was very short and they repeated themselves.
Pupils thought that speech was different to writing in the following ways: Speech is a shorthand and you don’t
think a lot about what you say. When you write you plan and it has to be clear because you are not there to help
if they get stuck; Speech is a lot shorter and only makes sense along with the actions; Speech makes sense if you
can see what’s happening; In writing it’s more difficult to show feelings; When we were filmed we didn’t have
time to plan. If we had, we would have seemed more formal; When you write you have to give more detail and
write clearly. When you’re speaking you don’t have to be so careful because you can use gestures; and When you
speak it’s much quicker than writing and you can see them [the partner] so it’s easier.
Comments on the words and phrases most frequently used in the transcripts (eg a bit, okay, like that, here like
this, right and yeah) indicated that the pupils were aware that this seemingly vague language was used because
with actions it makes sense. They noted such words also explain what you are saying when people were able to
point. Some pupils also felt that these words were part of a ‘checking’ process.
33
Classro
om
investig
ation
:d
eixis
Pupils were asked if they felt one form of instruction examined so far was more effective. They decided that
the spoken instructions had the benefit of being a quicker form of communication and began to understand that
speech and writing were very different forms of communication and each had benefits. They noted that in
speech there was the advantage of speed, vision, facial expressions, tone of voice and interaction.
When pupils ranked the instructions, they were aware of the importance of the graphics that clarified the
written instructions. They realised that this made the written instructions rather like the spoken instructions on
the video, because of the visual elements that were available. Most pupils found the instructions that relied
purely on the written format were least successful because they lacked the support of graphics. The written
instructions that they believed were the least effective were those describing how to create the ‘incredible
magic loop’.
There was an increased understanding of the importance of body language, prosodics and facial gestures to
pupils’ oral self-expression and interaction. This understanding constitutes an invaluable life skill.
Outcomes
Pupils were motivated because they themselves were one of the main resources and they had not previously
looked at speech in this way. I had anticipated that using pupils’ speech as a resource would be very demanding in
terms of teacher preparation time, but by keeping transcription very simple this was not an issue.
The project increased awareness of some of the main differences between speech and writing and raised the
status of speech in their eyes. Pupils had to consider why each form was suited to its purpose. It also made them
consider different degrees of formality in spoken communication and writing. Their responses showed an implicit
understanding of the difference between speech and writing, noting that the spontaneity of speech limits the
ability to engage in complex advance planning. They noticed the amount of repetition due to the pressure of
having to think on the spot, and commented on the effects of instant feedback from listeners.
Pupils also showed an ability to identify some features of deixis. Their surprise at the language they found they
used in the transcripts was pleasing and refreshing. They were aware of the need for greater precision and clarity
in their choice of language when writing, compared to speech. They realised that writing has to be planned and
organised carefully, can be reread and offers little feedback. Therefore, it does not use as many deictic
expressions. This raised consciousness of the difference between speech and writing was beneficial for both areas
of the English curriculum.
Overall, the work showed there is a place for studying speech in its own right and this can reflect positively on
writing. Studying one’s own speech has a high interest value for pupils and can be developed into many areas of
the English curriculum.
This type of work provided opportunities to study language at word level. In the written follow-up pupils
were able to consider sentence construction in the light of their awareness of the different structures used
in speech.
Pupils could go on to study media texts that are meant to represent real speech (eg soap operas). Study of
planned speeches would also be interesting, including looking at degrees of formality. Video footage of political
speeches would be valuable in observing the extra linguistic cues given in planned speech. Comparing this to
writing would emphasise sentence structure, level of precision, variety of vocabulary and structured repetition
and how it differs from unplanned speech.
34
Classro
om
investig
ation
:d
eixis
Is anything missing?
Year 12: ellipsis
The result of omitting subjects and verbs in sentences when speakers can assume shared knowledge
Aims
■ to enable students to investigate ellipsis in spoken English, using transcripts of students’
own conversation
■ to draw conclusions about their findings about the function of ellipsis in talk.
Context
The group comprised nine sixth-form English literature students, two of whom were also
studying English language. This proved useful in helping to define the specific parts of speech.
Lesson planning
There were three one-hour lessons. The work was mainly oral, supported by several prompt
sheets of data and questions. The final lesson applied the findings from work on everyday
spoken conversation to an analysis of dialogue in dramatic texts.
Lesson 1
The students were informed that they would be looking at one aspect of spoken language, and
to help with this it would be useful to record a short informal conversation involving all of
them. Apart from reassuring them of no ulterior or sinister motive for this, and putting them at
ease with the presence of the tape recorder, no other explanation was offered at this stage. As it
was the first lesson back after Christmas, the topic of ‘What did you watch on TV over
Christmas?’ was the start to the conversation. About 20 minutes of conversation was recorded,
from which three short extracts were transcribed for use the following day. One of the
transcripts used for analysis is included on page 36.
35
Classro
om
investig
ation
:ellip
sis
Lesson 1 handout
Lesson 2
Instead of specific names, each speaker was defined as Speaker 1, Speaker 2, etc. This form of
transcription, distancing students from actual names, helped the analysis and provoked
interesting discussion. There were occasions when the students did not realise in the reading of
the transcript that it was they who had said such a phrase. Indeed, on a couple of occasions the
original taped version had to be played back to convince students that they had made certain
utterances in certain ways.
To help students analyse the transcript from lesson 1, a series of printed prompt questions were
offered (lesson 2, handout 1).
36
Speaker
1 So what is the most memorable TV programme you watched?
2 Monarch of the Glen. [ellipsis: is the most memorable programme I watched]
[laughter] No,…I tell you… [ellipsis: it really was good]
1 Is that why you are wearing that jumper? [laughter]
2 No…seriously, tho’…I tell you. [ellipsis: it really was good]
1 What about you?
3 Mary Poppins… [ellipsis: is the most memorable programme I watched] [laughter]
2 Oh, yeah… [ellipsis: It is a] Classic film that… [ellipsis: is] Shakespeare in Love…
[ellipsis: is a good film]
4 Yeah, I really liked that… [ellipsis: film]
2 Mary Poppins… Yeah… [ellipsis: it is] mixed with adult humour and child humour.
[laughter] It appeals to me… I watched it every Saturday when I was young…
3 I did…yeah…
2 [ellipsis: At] My Nan’s…it was the only thing she had on video… It’s class… [ellipsis: It
was] really good. She’s god [laughter] …no, [ellipsis: When she is] sitting in those
clouds… [laughter] …no, seriously, she is tho’… And Bert knows more than anyone
else… [edit] I mean, why does she always have Wednesday off?…
Classro
om
investig
ation
:ellip
sis
Lesson 2, handout 1
Students worked in pairs to annotate the transcript sheet using the following codes:
■ explaining EX ■ clarifying CLA
■ agreeing AG ■ defending DEF
■ disagreeing DIS ■ questioning QUE
■ commenting COM ■ unclear U
■ supporting SUP
There was feedback and discussion after each question was answered.
Partly because time was running short, but also because with these sixth-form students the
nature of the analysis had taken a more academic form, the extension into writing stage
directions was not developed. Perhaps with younger, less specialised students, more active
dramatising or scripting activity would be appropriate as well as useful in promoting more
reflective feedback. The awareness of talk being more than just words had clearly come through
in the students’ comments, touching on gesture, situation, shared understanding and experience,
expression and tone. The use of the codes was particularly helpful in establishing initial
consideration of this.
Although time was very tight, by the end of the hour the group was able to draw some
important and specific conclusions about the nature of ellipsis (the terminology had now been
introduced to the students) within spoken grammar. Depending upon the group, different ways
may be used to gather a general overview of findings.
The handout shown on page 38 was provided to summarise.
37
Using the transcript from lesson 1, answer the following questions.
■ What words are missing?
■ What type or ‘class’ of words are those that are missing?
■ What is the function of the Mm and Yeah type responses?
■ Devise a code that explains what each line/comment is ‘doing’, for example agreeing or supporting.
■ By doing this, what things can you work out about each speaker?
■ Devise some ‘stage directions’ to explain how you think each line is delivered, thinking especially
about verbal tone as well as physical/visual gestures. For example is the speaker looking at the other
speaker and is one speaker pointing? These spoken language features are clearly different from
written. Why? Why are there apparently so many omissions?
Classro
om
investig
ation
:ellip
sis
Lesson 2, handout 2
Lesson 3
In this lesson the following questions were set:
■ If ellipsis is so prevalent in spoken English, what challenges does it pose to a dramatist, for
instance, in capturing the naturalness of speech/dialogue in a drama script?
■ How successfully have some achieved this?
■ Is it possible or useful, or does printed text for an audience prohibit this natural spoken
ellipsis?
Students were given samples from the following modern drama texts:
■ Alan Bennett, Talking Heads
■ Arthur Miller, Death of a Salesman
■ Willy Russell, Educating Rita
■ Tennessee Williams, Cat on a Hot Tin Roof
■ Harold Pinter, The Birthday Party.
They were asked to consider the effectiveness of any examples of ellipsis they could find.
Did it capture the qualities of spoken ellipsis previously identified or was it different? If so,
then why might this be?
Some interesting observations and reflections were raised. Students suggested that, although
Bennett made extensive use of ellipsis, occasionally capturing spoken ellipsis, much of these
monologues tended to be formally written. Bennett’s technique appeared to suggest authentic
speech by using textual ellipsis rather than replicating the spoken grammar form. The general
agreement was that Pinter from the very opening of The Birthday Party appeared to draw on
features of the ellipsis of informal spoken conversation, capturing it well in his script. Pupils
commented on the way a sense of comfort turned to threat as the feeling of shared experience
suddenly fell away when connections were not made, as would have been expected
in conversation.
38
Key features of ellipsis in spoken English
■ face-to-face proximity means that you don’t have to say it
■ shared knowledge of a subject, experience, etc means that you don’t have to say it
■ shared context or vision means you don’t have to say it (eg a TV sports commentator describing
the action on screen)
■ informal/formal axis – there are times when saying every word may seem inappropriate
(eg I am going to the shops becomes I’m going shops)
■ economy of communication (eg scalpel…scissors…swab…)
When relationships between speakers alter, we may need more ‘elaboration’ or descriptive detail
to ensure clarity and precision of communication. The questions what, when, who, why and where
prompt the use of more subjects and verbs and more nouns and adjectives in narrative context.
Classro
om
investig
ation
:ellip
sis
Teacher’s observations
Findings about spoken language
■ The stimulus of working on their own speech motivated interest, and the level of thought, comment and
growing perceptiveness towards the language structure was pleasing.
■ However good/natural the script is, a writer/director still needs the intuitive skills of the actor to work
with the text, for example the addition of pauses, contractions, and ums and ers in order to capture the
naturalness (including ellipsis) of authentic spoken English.
■ The ability of the dramatist/actor/director to construct the convincing context is especially important if
understanding of ellipsis is dependent upon situation.
■ Does plot drive language or language drive plot? Certainly a lot of recent modern drama seemed to have
experimented more with improvisation as opposed to rigidity of form/structure.
■ Equally, a drama script is an artificial construct that needs to use specific techniques in order to connect to
an audience, which is markedly different from the usual dynamics (and audience) of informal, everyday spoken
communication.
■ The nature of spoken grammar changing at certain levels along the formal/informal continuum was also of
interest, but was only touched upon.
■ Communication involves more than words.
Outcomes
■ This was, of necessity, a short and narrowly focused investigation. The study here works with a mainly
discursive approach, while younger students and larger groups may benefit from a more active and
kinaesthetic investigation, although this would open up further logistical considerations.
■ It was a worthwhile exercise from which the students (and the teacher) gained a lot, including a greater
awareness of ellipsis within both written and spoken contexts. If anything, it opened it up as a bigger issue
than we had all first expected and, frustratingly, the three lessons were enough to whet the appetite but not
to take it further. Students gained a lot from discussion and looking closely at transcripts of spoken language.
So much is intuitive that it requires transcription to make clear just how the grammar of speech is
functioning; it is a lot harder to detect by just listening.
■ The approach to teaching tended to be mainly oral group discussion. It would have been interesting to try the
transcripts on other students who were unfamiliar with the initial conversation to see if similar levels of
interest and response were evident. Nevertheless, the principles that support this investigation can easily be
adapted for use with younger groups. Use of stage directions, scripting actors’ gestures, and working out the
precise tone and meaning for delivery as a drama script might also be helpful. The overall spin-off, hopefully,
would be some increased understanding and a more tuned ear to identify some of these features of language.
■ There may be risks in teaching about spoken grammar and written grammar in the same lessons and in linking
written, literary grammar and spoken features as has been done here. Nevertheless, there are some clear links
between the two that can be used within the demands of busy classroom time. Whilst we might need to be
cautious, we also need to be open to the potential teaching and learning possibilities investigations like this may
offer teachers and their pupils. I’m hopeful that my sixth-formers may now have a better tuned eye and ear
for these particular features, should they be present (textually) in their A2 synoptic materials at the end of
their A level course!
39
Classro
om
investig
ation
:ellip
sis
40
Telling tales
Year 10: spoken clause structure
Chains of clauses coordinated by and or linked with cos or so, rather than developed into sentences with main and subordinate clauses
Aims
■ to investigate how units of sense (‘clauses’) could be linked together in talk
■ to concentrate on spoken rather than written English
■ to develop an understanding of the oral tradition, particularly storytelling, as a point of
reference for their own talk
■ to speak with greater fluency and coherence.
Context
The class was a year 10 English group in a mixed comprehensive school in Wales. Of the
30 pupils, 24 pupils are expected to achieve A*–C grades at GCSE. A main focus of the school
has been to give pupils greater confidence in speaking and listening activities and more
opportunities to extend their talk.
Lesson planning
Four lessons formed the basis of the investigation, using picture stimuli, brainstorming and
audio-recording to focus pupils on the structure of stories, helped by transcripts of some of the
stories told.
Lesson 1
Pupils were shown national curriculum level descriptions for oracy. To attain a level 7,
pupils need to do some of the following:
■ confidently adapt the way they speak to the demands of the context
■ use vocabulary precisely and organise clearly
■ structure speech carefully
■ use standard English confidently
■ use appropriate vocabulary, tone and emphasis in speech.
Pupils were given pictures from Little Red Riding Hood and Cinderella. Simple, well-known
stories were chosen so content could be generated easily, and to maximise the short time
available for the investigation of spoken clause structure. Pupils were asked to brainstorm the
main features of these stories and we created a class OHT of common features. The whole class
discussed these stories as part of the oral tradition. In the past, all tales such as these would
have been told, rather than read, by skilful storytellers. There followed a brief discussion of
why an oral story would differ from a written one.
In pairs, pupils were asked to think of the structure of a traditional story (eg Sleeping Beauty
or The Three Little Pigs). They organised the story into five chronological steps in very brief
note form.
In each pair one took the role of storyteller, the other the listener. The storyteller used the notes
to tell the story. The listener’s role was to assess the performance of the storyteller using the
criteria in handout 1 for lesson 1.
Classro
om
investig
ation
:sp
oken
clause stru
cture
Lesson 1, handout 1
The pupils then swapped roles. Some students in the groups were adised to consider organising
the structure of their stories in different ways, for example beginning at the end of the story
and using flashbacks or telling the story from the viewpoint of different narrators. Although the
activity and speech was informal, they also took their role as assessor seriously.
Lesson 2
Pupils recorded some of their stories from lesson 1 using dictaphones and tape recorders.
Pens were banned for this lesson and the focus was completely on speaking and listening.
Transcripts were made from two of the pupils’ stories (both on Goldilocks). One had been
marked as good (¨¨¨); the other as very good (¨¨¨¨).
Lesson 3
At the beginning of the lesson, pupils listened to the two stories on tape and considered the
differences in quality. They said the very good story was better because it was longer, clearer,
had a bit more information, and was funnier and more fluent.
In groups of four, pupils were asked to use the transcripts to explain why they thought the very
good story was better than the good story. Their initial observations were relatively informal,
for example: It’s funnier; It’s clearer; There is less hesitation; You can understand it better; It’s
in the right order; It’s more fluent.
Obviously some of the points were the same as before, but the aim was for pupils to use the
transcripts to identify the features that made the ‘very good’ story more fluent. It was at this
point that pupils were asked to identify ‘units of sense’ in the speech and how they were linked.
In groups they were asked to annotate the transcripts, highlighting ‘units of sense’ with one
colour and ‘linking devices’ with another colour.
41
Criteria for effective storytelling
The storyteller gets muddled and does not link the separate parts of
the story. There is a lot of hesitation; some parts of the story do not
make sense or are too brief.
¨
poor
The storyteller gives an account of all parts of the story. He/she is able
to tell the story in the correct order so that it makes sense. The story,
however, is brief and over-reliant on notes. There is little variation in
tone and expression, and the storyteller does little to entertain.
¨¨
average
The storyteller describes most parts of the story fluently. He/she is
quite confident, but does hesitate a bit. The story is told in the correct
order. The storyteller sometimes varies tone and expression. He/she
tries to make the story entertaining.
¨¨¨
good
The storyteller includes all parts of the story. S/he is confident and links the
separate parts of the story well so that it is well organised and easy to
follow. S/he speaks very fluently. The storyteller varies the tone and
expression when s/he speaks. S/he delivers the story in an entertaining way.
¨¨¨¨
very good
Classro
om
investig
ation
:sp
oken
clause stru
cture
They recognised that the ‘better’ story was more effectively organised because the ‘units of
sense’ were linked well. At the start of the transcript, it was very much like the written version,
beginning with a traditional opening: ‘Once upon a time…’ and because of the familiarity of
the narrative, the units of sense were generally well-remembered sentences. These written
language constructions were impossible to sustain and the units of sense became a mixture of
sentences and clauses.
The groups identified the most significant common links in the clause chains and placed them
in rank order: so, and, because, but, well, then, now, like (to denote direct speech or used as a
filler), also, however, finally and once again.
The class was asked to identify which words did not link well; they chose well and like because
they were seen as fillers rather than linkers. Finally, pupils were asked to consider alternatives to
the ones listed above in order to expand the ‘link bank’. Some of the class went on to test the
apparent frequency of the links and to find reasons for why this might be the case.
Lesson 4
Pupils were allowed to use their link banks to help them tell another story. No pens were
allowed for this activity. In groups of four, pupils were given three sets of picture cards with the
general headings: ‘person’, ‘place’ and ‘object’. The cards were shuffled and individual pupils
asked to select a card from each set. They were then asked to make up and tell a story using
each of the three cards. This produced some entertaining combinations and stories, for example
the story of the caretaker in the headmaster’s office with the tape recorder.
Pupils were encouraged to extend their talk and to talk more fluently by using the words
they had identified in their link bank. Pupils were once again asked to assess one another’s
performance.
42
Classro
om
investig
ation
:sp
oken
clause stru
cture
Teacher’s observations
Findings about spoken language
■ Lesson 1 was an activity the pupils enjoyed and they certainly entertained one other.
■ Pupils learned much about the way in which the voice contributes to emphasis in a spoken story.
■ Pupils learned that links between units of sense are crucial to the way in which both sequences of individual
spoken clauses and the whole stories are heard and read.
■ They understood that there are key differences between spoken and written media for narration. The study
of transcripts was an important stimulus to such understanding.
Outcomes
■ Initially, I found it difficult to think of ways of extending pupils’ speech without providing them with a
structured framework. I was afraid of turning it into a ‘written’ speech. I was also keen to ensure that pupils
thought about their own structure and that the words in the link bank were words that they used themselves.
At the end of the exercise, pupils were using a variety of linking devices, which helped to improve coherence
and fluency. Of course, this is just one of the many features which help a storyteller narrate an entertaining
story. I asked the pupils to choose familiar stories at the start so that they could concentrate on developing
the skill.
■ The idea of using the term ‘units of sense’ to apply to sentences and clauses seemed to make sense to the
pupils and I will use the term again when teaching speaking and listening.
■ When preparing pupils for individual speaking tasks in the future, I will try to help them structure their talk by
encouraging them to use a variety of linking words and phrases as opposed to ‘fillers’. This will have a positive
impact on the fluency and coherence of their talk.
43
Classro
om
investig
ation
:sp
oken
clause stru
cture
Negotiating through talk
Year 8: purposefully vague language
Words and phrases that make assertions less definite, more appropriate and sometimes more polite
Aims
■ to explore the relationship between vague language and purpose, audience and degrees of
formality in naturally occurring speech
■ to examine possible gender or other socio-linguistic differences in the use of purposefully
vague language
■ to provide pupils with a choice of models for persuasive speaking.
Context
The year 8 pupils were in a class of 31, and included a number of boys underachieving in
written tasks but confident in oral activities. The pupils were following a programme of active
listening activities, linked to the implementation of a whole-school citizenship initiative, as part
of a thinking skills focus.
Lesson planning
The investigation was carried out in three 100-minute lessons as part of a wider programme of
speaking and listening activities, many of which arose from class study of The Tulip Touch by
Anne Fine. Links to the teaching objectives2 for speaking and listening in the key stage 3
Framework for teaching English were:
■ tell a story/recount an experience, choosing and changing the mood, tone and pace of
delivery for particular effect (Y8SL2)
■ recognise their own skills, strategies and responses as listeners in different situations (Y8SL6)
■ listen for a specific purpose, paying sustained attention and selecting for comment or
question that which is relevant to the agreed focus (Y8SL7).
Additionally, sixth-form students of English language and literature were briefed on the concept
and application of purposefully vague language in talk. Transcription skills were revised and
arrangements were made for these students to visit the year 8 class on at least three occasions
to participate in preparation, recording or feedback sessions.
Lesson 1
Pairs of pupils were given two minutes to come up with suggestions for new words ending with
‘ish’, identifying whether the word was an adjective, a number or a noun. They had to put one
example in a sentence.
We discussed the context and purpose for adding this suffix. This developed into a discussion
on the differences between purposefully vague language and direct language in terms of purpose
and context. Other features of purposefully vague language were explained using examples
44
2 In the key stage 3 Framework for teaching English:■ Y = year■ SL = speaking and listening■ LV = language variation.
Classro
om
investig
ation
:p
urp
osefu
lly vagu
e lang
uag
e
drawn from the ‘At the hairdresser’s’ unit from Exploring spoken English (Carter and
McCarthy, 1997, pages 104–7).
Working in pairs, pupils were asked to highlight a particular linguistic feature. The features
allocated to pairs were:
■ discourse markers ■ time approximations
■ modal expressions ■ slang expressions
■ ellipsis ■ the word just.
■ the suffixes -ish and -y
Pupils asked each other questions on what they had learnt, ranging from simple definitions of
linguistic features to conventions of transcribing speech and purpose/context for using
particular features.
Lesson 2
As the register was called, pupils had to call out another word for toilet. Pupils discussed which
of these were appropriate when speaking to a teacher, a friend or a shop worker.
Pupils decided to email askoxford.com to request euphemisms for difficult subjects: death,
disability and obesity. They discussed the link between speech choices and purpose explicitly in
this context, highlighting the softening function of purposefully vague language.
The class listened to a short extract from The Hiding Place by Trezza Azzopardi, in which a
young girl attempts to tattoo her younger sister’s arm. The extract contains no dialogue.
In pairs, pupils were asked to role-play the scene in which the older child tries to manipulate
the younger one into having the tattoo. The pairs went on to role-play a conversation in which
one tries to persuade the other to have a treatment, for example a piercing, new hair
colour/style or fashion makeover.
45
Classro
om
investig
ation
:p
urp
osefu
lly vagu
e lang
uag
e
Several pairs performed their role-play and pupils in the audience raised their hands when they
identified a feature of purposefully vague language. At the end of each performance, the pupils
in the audience commented on the purpose of the feature identified. The lesson ended with a
recap on how useful purposefully vague language can be in negotiation/manipulation.
For homework, pupils paired up to produce a short recording and transcript of a conversation
between two people about what they had done at the weekend.
Lesson 3
The sixth-formers introduced themselves to their group and groups were allocated rooms and
workspaces. They had been briefed to prompt and chair discussion on purposefully vague
language features in the recording.
Sixth-formers and groups discussed their findings and evaluated what they had most enjoyed
and what they had learnt from the activity.
All the activities were much enjoyed and many pupils commented on how much they welcomed
the opportunity to talk informally in the classroom. They particularly liked working with the
sixth-formers and many said they would like to take the research further themselves when they
are older. Predictably, the least popular activity was the transcription, because it was so fiddly,
although they said they were glad they now knew how to do it.
Future plans were developed: a bookmark competition to invent a design to explain the use of
purposefully vague language, with features on one side and uses on the other; a lunchtime
session in which the group demonstrated some features of purposefully vague language through
paired role play, while the other year 8 group of similar ability made persuasive speeches.
The theme was persuading someone to get fit.
46
Classro
om
investig
ation
:p
urp
osefu
lly vagu
e lang
uag
e
Teacher’s observations
Findings about spoken language
■ An enhanced ability to make conscious, informed choices about language.
■ A stronger sense of the dynamic and interpersonal dimension of talk.
■ A more confident and purposeful approach to class talk.
■ A sense of themselves as highly skilled and versatile users of spoken language.
■ Higher expectations and pride in spoken outcomes, comparable with (and sometimes superior to) that of
written outcomes.
■ Understanding that formal does not always mean correct and vice versa.
■ An awareness of the relationship between purposefully vague language and other features of spoken language,
especially modality.
■ A greater respect for classroom talk.
■ A wider repertoire of learning approaches in the classroom.
I was astonished at how quickly pupils picked up the terminology. It became a feature of lessons that, when I
used modal expressions or discourse markers, someone would put their hand up to comment! It made all of us
much more conscious of how teacher and pupil talk worked on a daily basis.
I was surprised by the differences between the way boys and girls incorporated purposefully vague language into
their speech. Girls used backchannels, tag questions, modal expressions, vague suffixes, general words such as
thing and stuff and time approximations more than boys. Boys used more discourse markers. Overall, purposefully
vague language was more frequently and richly used in paired discussions of girls and this applied to everyday
interactional speech and to speech with a more direct negotiating function.
Outcomes
Although I decided to focus on features of everyday speech, I would have preferred to tie this in with the work
we were doing on The Tulip Touch, but the timing was wrong. This would have enabled pupils to probe the
characterisation much more deeply and would have released them from a degree of self-consciousness if the
speakers were fictitious but highly plausible fictitious characters. I am convinced that speaking and listening
should have a more prominent place in many of our schemes of work and this research has demonstrated that
we can do this without losing intellectual rigour or challenge.
I used an example of pupils’ work from this research to show governors how pupils can achieve outcomes beyond
expectations for their age group if they are given opportunities to do live research, using methods and
terminology usually reserved for older pupils.
Future plans will include:
■ using the correct terminology to describe linguistic features of classroom talk and dialogue in literature
■ extending the range of key features covered incrementally
■ spending more time consolidating understanding of the relationship between purposefully vague language and
modal expressions
■ revising schemes of work to incorporate more explicit teaching of formal and informal techniques in speech
■ further investigating the impact of group size and gender on different kinds of speaking and
listening activities.
47
Classro
om
investig
ation
:p
urp
osefu
lly vagu
e lang
uag
e
Formality and informality
Year 7: modal expressions
Words and phrases that make it possible for speakers to shift their stance towards a subject, as they speak, depending on their listeners’ responses
Aims
■ to develop specific awareness of differences within spoken English, especially the continuum
from informal to formal usage
■ to enhance pupils’ ability to pick up on subtle clues to people’s mood and intention in ways
that would benefit oral presentations across the curriculum, including drama and PSHE.
Context
The school serves a post-mining community in Cornwall, and is part of an Education Action
Zone. The class taught was a top-set year 7 group, working with year 8 objectives.
The 28 pupils in the class (18 girls and 10 boys) were cooperative and enthusiastic.
There were four 50-minute lessons, including one double period.
Lesson planning
The investigation followed on from a unit of work in which pupils carried out investigations
and taught mini-lessons to the rest of the group.
The teaching objectives from the key stage 3 strategy Framework for teaching English were:
■ year 7 sentence level 15 and 16; Y7SL2, 15, 16, 17 and 19
■ year 8 sentence level 12; Y8SL7, 8, 12, 15 and 16.
Pupils were organised into groups of three or four according to ability. Each member of the
group was given a specific role (task manager, assessment manager, resource manager or
motivator) and trained appropriately. Groups were also coached in collaborative group work.
Resources consisted of two transcripts of conversations, one from a more formal setting, the
other less formal. Pupils also used highlighter pens and wrote on large paper rather than
exercise books. The work on modal expressions built on previous key stage 2 work.
Lessons 1 and 2
Each group was given a piece of plain A4 paper to make notes on. On the board was written
‘It must be sort of difficult to phone or whatever’. The groups were asked to discuss the
following questions.
■ What is the central message?
■ Why has the speaker used the other words?
■ Who is speaker addressing and what is the evidence for this?
After a short whole-class discussion, the term ‘modal expressions’ was introduced, and the
appropriate words and phrases from the text were highlighted and discussed.
Each pupil was then given a handout of a transcript taken from a pre-match discussion between
three football pundits. The aim of this activity was to highlight the modal expressions used by
the pundits, to identify who might be speaking and to describe the effects of the modal
expressions. This activity was repeated with a second transcript, which represented a more
formal conversation involving a person asking a secretary for an application form for a
teaching position.
48
Classro
om
investig
ation
:m
od
al expressio
ns
Transcript A
Transcript B
49
Speaker
1 Great setting, Mark Lawrenson.
2 Fantastic John, and, uh, we, you know, and every time we do a game at St James’s Park,
we rave about the atmosphere; well, I’ll tell you what, that was absolutely the best,
which is a big thing to say when you consider the fifty-odd thousand at St James’s. The
streamers that came down from the roof of the stand, that was extremely impressive.
They’re obviously very, very vocal as well, Ian, you feel like, well, we are sat right
amongst them.
3 Yeah, Bobby Robson was saying, Sir Bobby last night, that I think, well obviously he was
here many times because he’s worked here in Holland at PSV Eindhoven, and, uh, he was
saying that it is very like St James’s Park in terms of the atmosphere and they really do
throw themselves into it the Feyernord supporters. And the two captains shaking hands
across the half way line now, Paul Bosfeld of Feyernord and Alan Shearer. Both sides in
their first choice shirts tonight: Feyernord red and white shirts, Newcastle in the black
and white stripes.
[The setting is a school office.]
A Good morning, may I have an application form for the position of Science Teacher?
B By all means – and your name?
A … Durber – D.U.R.B.E.R., tricky one isn’t it?
B Um. Can I take your telephone number Mrs Durber?
A Of course, it’s…
B Lovely!
A Would there be any chance of me coming into school, at your convenience, for a look around?
If that was alright?
B When were you thinking?
A I don't mind, I suppose when things are not too busy for yourselves.
B I’ll speak to Mr… Head of Science.
A That would be great, if it isn’t too much trouble. You see it might give me a greater insight
into the school!
B Yes. So we’ll get back to you on that, we have your number. As soon as I’ve spoken to…, I’ll
ring you.
A Oh, that’s great, thanks.
B Right, see you soon.
A Bye…thanks.
B Bye now.
Classro
om
investig
ation
:m
od
al expressio
ns
Pupils were then asked to place both texts on a continuum:
Informal speech Formal speech
The pupils decided that both texts are informal but that the TV commentary is a little less
formal because the speakers are interacting by giving opinions in a relaxed and familiar
environment. They stress their personal viewpoints with modal expressions such as absolutely
and obviously. In the second text, the situation is a little more formal because a specific request
is being made in a context in which the speakers are not familiar and in which it is important
to be both more precise and at the same time polite. There is a polite softening of response with
modal expressions such as I suppose and would there be any chance alongside more
conventional modal verbs such as may and might.
Lessons 3 and 4
Groups organised a role-play, in which one pupil was a teacher attempting to evacuate a class
when a fire alarm has been signalled and another pupil played a frightened pupil who does not
want to leave the building. The third pupil in the group was trained as an observer, specifically
looking for the use of modal expressions. When there were four pupils in a group, two of them
played as pupils, but only one not wanting to leave. After the role-play, the observer debriefed
the group on their use of modal expressions. It was decided that in this context the language
used is more direct and unambiguous; for example, the use of imperatives and modal verbs
such as you must, you have to and you cannot indicate that softening would be out of
place here.
This was followed by a second role-play, focusing on a less formal situation. Groups were given
the choice of telling a friend that their new haircut was unsuitable, or that they had been
‘dumped’ by a boyfriend or girlfriend. Before the role-play began, groups were asked to guess
whether more or fewer direct modal expressions would be used in these situations, compared to
the earlier role-play. The pupil who had been the observer in the first role-play now took part
in the new role-play, with another pupil being trained as the observer. Again pupils were
debriefed by their observers and their original hypothesis was tested. It was found that
language that is too direct can be hurtful so softening occurs, but the group pointed out that
it can sometimes be kind to be direct in such situations.
50
Classro
om
investig
ation
:m
od
al expressio
ns
51
Teacher’s observations
Findings about spoken language
In the first lesson all groups had a good level of discussion about the phrase written on the board. Suggestions
ranged from It could be a doctor talking to another doctor about trying to get bad news to a family to It’s one
friend saying to another about his broken phone. Every group, however, was able to recognise that the phrase
was most likely to be used between peers. Some pupils were also able to identify the softening effects of the
modal expressions quite quickly, with one pupil introducing the phrase to soften, with which I was especially
pleased.
However, while most groups could identify the modal expressions in the first transcript, they also thought that
some of the other phrases, especially Um, were also modal expressions. This led to some interesting discussion
about the differences and overlaps between modal expressions and other types of spoken language, which
covered purposefully vague language, discourse markers and deixis. The second transcript of the more formal
discussion proved to be more straightforward, and it was when pupils had completed the analysis of this
transcript that I felt confident in pupils’ ability to recognise modal expressions accurately. All groups were in
agreement about the respective positioning of the transcripts on the informal–formal continuum.
The role-plays went particularly well. In itself, role-play was not an activity I had previously used with this group,
but they had used it in primary school and in drama at secondary school. When the observers had left the room
with a colleague to prepare their roles, I was impressed by the level of discussion about the subject of evacuating
a school in an emergency. All pupils recognised that few modal expressions would be used initially, and a few quickly
picked up that there may be occasions when such strategies would be necessary, and this was what they then
prepared. I was surprised at most groups instinctively reaching for pen and paper to script the role-plays, which I
allowed initially, but I was also surprised that most groups did not actually use their scripts during their mini-
performances. The role-plays did not take very long, so I asked participants to swap roles, which they did very
easily and with a greater sense of improvisation. It tended to be from the second role-play that the observers
took most of their comments.
Ultimately, then, I am confident in saying that the pupils successfully learnt about modal expressions and how to
use them appropriately. This was demonstrated by their role-plays and the comments of observers. There were
no real written outcomes, which makes such an assessment problematic to an extent, but in fact this was one of
the aspects which pupils enjoyed the most.
Classro
om
investig
ation
:m
od
al expressio
ns
Outcomes
I was impressed with how this activity developed, and I would not make any major changes. The only significant
change would be for pupils to study the transcripts in a different order. The second transcript, which involved
fewer modal expressions, allowed pupils to identify them more easily than the first transcript, and I would
rather pupils first experience success, rather than confusion. Other than that I would not make any significant
changes. This activity was enjoyable and challenging for pupils and teachers alike, and the fact that it involved no
major written outcomes was especially motivating for the pupils.
■ In terms of progression, I would like to develop this unit to include the elements of spoken English which we
discussed at quite an early stage. This would have helped to clear up any confusion with the first transcript.
Such a unit might become part of an even larger unit, focusing on speaking and listening, which is a key
objective for our school’s ‘literacy across the curriculum’ programme. Our school is in an area where pupils do
not enjoy much opportunity to develop their spoken language, and many suffer as a result. I see the
development of understanding how spoken language operates as crucial to the future success of our pupils.
Traditional speaking and listening activities often concentrate on more formal, and sometimes simply artificial
aspects of spoken language, which may meet examination criteria, but are of no real use in other situations.
By working on elements such as modal expressions, pupils can develop an understanding of how their own
language works, and how they can use it to best effect.
■ Making talk about spoken grammar more explicit will move pupils closer to becoming more conscious and
articulate about forms and functions of language, as encouraged by the key stage 3 strategy. I feel that this
will empower pupils by recognising their ‘own’ speech as worthy of study, rather than the more traditional
approach of studying examples of famous speeches. By teaching pupils how to analyse and develop their own
speech in realistic ways, we are equipping them with very useful tools indeed.
■ I would broaden any unit of work to include other elements of spoken grammar, most notably vague language,
discourse markers and deixis, as these were the elements that would have benefited pupils the most,
and they seemed to grasp these elements relatively quickly.
■ As head of English, I will be revising our schemes of work to include elements of spoken grammar, but I will
also need some INSET time with my team, because they are not familiar with the terms.
■ Assessing the use of key features of spoken English would have to be considered carefully. It may become an
empowering experience for pupils. However, it is important to distinguish pupils’ use of these key features as
part of their everyday experience from more conscious use in a school setting. As part of everyday
experience talk can be studied and analysed, but the purpose and focus of assessment of talk needs
further thought.
52
Classro
om
investig
ation
:m
od
al expressio
ns
Approaches to spoken English in theclassroom
Focus on talk as talk
The features described in previous sections are unique to talk; they have no straightforward
correspondences in writing. Teaching about them needs to start with this in mind and aim to
focus on talk as talk, using the spoken language as both medium and message. This will help
pupils appreciate the distinctiveness of the grammar of spoken language. The group of features
highlighted in this work forms a good basis for further learning about and exploration of
language, but it is not an exhaustive account of the grammar of talk, nor is it a prescriptive
system. The value of the approaches suggested lies in their way of enhancing what is
already planned.
As the classroom investigations show, some of the principles underlying effective teaching about
talk are based on:
■ the use of oral not written texts that capture the spontaneity of talk
■ practical examples arising from classroom exchanges
■ investigative work done by pupils themselves
■ clear and explicit descriptions of the selected grammatical features.
With these principles in mind, both pupils and teachers found the work interesting in its own
right and worthwhile in relation to other aspects of the English curriculum. In particular,
pupils responded to the clarity and explicitness with which aspects of talk could be described
and discussed.
53
Teachers who carried out the investigative work in their classrooms used different teaching
strategies. In years 7 and 8, two of the investigations were mapped directly onto key stage 3
strategy Framework for teaching English objectives and were carried out within a lesson
structure of starter, main activity and plenary. In all of the classes, there was a mixture of
explicit, whole-class teaching and active investigation by pupils working in groups.
Developing the national curriculum programmes of study
A focus on the grammar of talk offers new routes into the national curriculum requirements for
speaking and listening. It not only balances the tendency to think of grammar only in relation
to written language, it also (as with explicit teaching about writing) begins to map out for
pupils an explicit understanding of how oral communications are structured and how, as
speakers and listeners, they can make use of this knowledge in and out of the classroom.
■ Work on the grammar of spoken language will aid understanding of how and why talk is
different from writing. This could include clarifying why some written texts, unlike spoken
exchanges, are not well served by extensive use of deixis or clauses chained together, and
contrasting this with the advantage of using talk when we are trying to explore complex
subject matter.
■ Language variation is an important section throughout the programmes of study. It covers
the study of current influences on speech and writing and how language changes. Over
recent years our ability to record, classify and access large collections of spoken language
data electronically means that it is now possible to trace change and variation in speech in
ways that have previously only been viable for writing. This adds a new dimension to the
requirement to teach about current influences on spoken and written language, and to
explore in a more informed way some of the differences between speech and writing.
■ A further dimension of the programmes of study concerns work in drama, improvisation,
working in role or scripting dramatic performances, which will be enhanced by greater
understanding of the features of authentic oral language.
■ A theme in all work on spoken language is for pupils to develop clearer understanding of
formality and informality and how to move effectively along this scale. All of the
grammatical features we have looked at contribute to patterns in formal or informal usage:
knowing how and why such features cluster together is a way of refining pupils’
understanding of variation in talk, whether in terms of clues when listening or as help when
speaking in a range of situations.
These features of spoken language do not need to be taught in a particular order. In the project
as a whole, we found that primary as well as secondary classes were able to develop work
around them. We are not yet able to define progression in teaching spoken grammar: all the
classroom work done so far has indicated that teachers are able to introduce these ideas and
ways of attending to language to pupils in several key stages and in different year groups.
54
Using the strategy objectives for teaching
A logical place to start would be in key stage 3, as this is the key stage in which there is most
scope for developing knowledge about language in all modes. It is also where the Framework
for teaching English: years 7, 8 and 9 (DfEE, 2001) has already mapped out a termly
programme of objectives. For instance:
■ in work on drama, when improvising or scripting scenarios, knowledge about how actual
conversation relies on ellipsis, deixis and clause chaining is helpful in enabling pupils to
devise more convincing exchanges (links to Y7SL15)
■ fluent use of deixis and modal expressions is part of giving effective spoken instructions
(links to Y7SL4)
■ awareness of the place of vague language and how this connects with modal expressions
will help pupils participate in a range of spoken interactions where it is important to
negotiate complex or sensitive subject matter, or to establish productive working
relationships in groups (links to Y7SL10, leading to Y8SL10)
■ pupils’ skills as critical listeners can be sharpened by knowing more about how speakers
may structure their talk, using heads and tails to introduce or recap on what they have said
(links to Y8SL2)
■ similarly, knowledge about the prevalence of clause chaining in talk, and the intricacy of the
utterances that sometimes develop because of this, can alert pupils to a resource for
sustaining their own talk as well as suggesting moments when, as listeners, they might
strategically intervene in a conversation (links to Y7SL3, helpful for Y8SL7)
■ as part of an oral assignment for GCSE, pupils benefit from understanding more about the
use and impact of a range of discourse markers (builds on Y8SL3).
55
Further ways of embedding teaching about spoken grammar into existing schemes of work are
outlined. The approach suggested is about enhancing opportunities in speaking and listening,
not planning a new curriculum.
Examples
Year 8
A teacher linked work on formal presentations with critical listening and encouraged
pupils to notice how varying degrees of formality impact on the selection and
organisation of subject matter. She taught pupils about signalling spoken clause structure
and purposefully vague language in the context of relevant strategy objectives.
The teaching objectives were:
■ to make a formal presentation in standard English, using appropriate rhetorical
devices (SL3)
■ to recognise the range of ways in which messages are conveyed, for example tone,
emphasis and status of speaker (SL8)
■ to explore and use different degrees of formality in written and oral texts
(Sentence level 12).
Year 7
A teacher worked on ways of developing pupils’ confidence in telling oral stories and
promoting more focused listening in class. She saw this as a way of extending pupils’
knowledge of some of the contrasts between spoken and written texts. This work drew
together three teaching objectives for the year group and introduced pupils to spoken
clause structure and deixis.
The teaching objectives were:
■ to recount a story, anecdote or experience, and consider how this differs from written
narrative (SL2)
■ to recognise the way familiar spoken texts are organised and identify their typical
features (SL9)
■ to investigate differences between spoken and written language structures
(Sentence level 16).
56
Finding opportunities on the speech–writing continuum
A fruitful and engaging starting point for work on spoken grammar is the speech–writing
continuum. Successful and effective writing now sometimes contains features more usually
associated with the spoken language and with spoken grammar. Indeed, a significant change
affecting the English language at the end of the twentieth century has been the growing
presence of spoken forms in writing.
One of the effects of inserting spoken features into written texts can be to form texts that are
playful and creative, exploiting the inherent capacity for wordplay and departures from norms
that is characteristic of much spoken interaction. Space has restricted our opportunity to
display this kind of creativity in common talk and everyday informal discourse, but further
explorations can be found in Crystal (1988) and Carter (2004).
Pupils’ existing familiarity with emails, text messages, popular journalism and reportage means
that subject matter for discussion is not hard to find. Pupils are probably less clear about how
writers draw on this resource to achieve particular impact and effects, and the ways in which
spoken language is being used in written texts.
Year 9
A teacher used the instruction of interview techniques to develop explicit self-evaluation
of listening skills. The work was underpinned by exploration of heads and tails, vague
language and spoken clause structure.
The teaching objectives were:
■ to develop interview techniques, including planning a series of linked questions,
helping the respondent to give useful answers, and responding to and extending the
responses (SL3)
■ to reflect on and evaluate their own skills, strategies and successes as listeners in a
variety of contexts (SL4).
57
‘Starters’ (the opening phase of many lessons) are an ideal context for introducing teaching
features of spoken grammar because they are short, focused and interactive.
Note that not all the core features of spoken grammar are covered here. The examples are
indicative only.
Informal journalism
Writers also achieve impact and get on a ‘conversational’ wavelength with their readers by
using ellipsis in combination with common spoken discourse markers such as OK, right and
well, and modal expressions such as actually, certainly, definitely, exactly and of course, which
can often serve as response tokens and replies in conversational exchanges. Such styles are
common in advertising discourse and in journalism. Here is an example of a year 11 pupil
writing for a school sports newsletter:
Well, you won’t believe how the team did this year. OK, you do. Exactly. We lost eight
out of ten matches. But, guess what? We won the last two matches and we now have
every confidence to prepare for the coming season. We are going to improve. Right?
In addition to applying knowledge about these features in various types of persuasive writing of
their own, pupils could explore the ways in which ‘actual’ spoken dialogue is represented in
fiction and drama, taking note of overlapping grammatical patterns.
Making descriptions more immediate
In spoken language, heads and tails help to orient the listener to what is happening or to reinforce
what has been said. Increasingly, writers are using them strategically for similar reasons.
A quick 10-minute starter could take the form of a game, making use of commonly occurring
samples from everyday sources.
Resources needed: a collection of clearly printed heads and tails projected on an OHT slide and
coins to toss. Each time the coin is tossed, and heads or tails called, the pupil has to identify
one from the overhead transparency.
Heads are common in menus, for example Very special, our locally caught sea-bass. The
ellipted head very special is fronted in order to draw our attention to what is to follow. The full
head would be, It’s very special, our… It can seem (and sound) as if the writer is addressing the
reader more directly and more as part of a dialogue.
Tails have a similar effect, where the tail not only adds emphasis to the statement but also
imparts a specifically ‘spoken’ character to the writing.
She’s a woman who really knows her own mind is this former royal reporter.
(The Daily Mail, 30 January 2004)
A more ‘written’ version of this sentence would be:
This former royal reporter is a woman who really knows her own mind.
Follow-up work could include using heads and tails for emphasis in specific text types, such as
advertising copy or biographical sketches, making sure that pupils understand what is unusual
about these expressions and how they convey a sense of immediacy.
58
Emails and faxes
Ellipsis appears increasingly in written contexts and is especially common in faxes, email and
internet communications. The relative immediacy of much email communication means that the
preferred style is one of friendly informality and the ellipsis encodes this, as this email from a
year 10 pupil to her aunt shows.
Hi there! Change of plan. Going to be staying in Brum after all. All trains are booked up for
coming back up, and none of my m8s are coming back anyway. Got 4 essays to write and
I want to get them done b4 Xmas. Sorry to disappoint, and give my love to the oldies!!!
jillxxxxxx
Pupils could talk about how much of a ‘message’ can be abbreviated and, in a range of
electronic and other texts, begin to categorise the grammatical features which are most easily
elided or abbreviated.
Creating informality in writing
Speakers often use vague language to soften expressions so that they do not appear too direct
or assertive. Writers import words and phrases such as thing, stuff, or so, or something and
sort of as a way of sounding casual, informal and friendly.
He’s been to all the big sports events: the Rugby World Cup, European Cup Football
Finals, Wimbledon and all that kind of thing. (Observer Magazine, 15 January 2004)
We reckon congestion charges could cause a hundred or so fewer cars to enter the city
centre. (Nottingham Evening Post, 21 January 2004)
In examples such as these, pupils can be encouraged to analyse the ways that spoken grammar
and vocabulary go together to reinforce the impact.
A useful extension of discussion about writers’ purposes in not wishing to ‘talk down’ to their
readers – and how effective these techniques are – would be to encourage pupils to review their
own writing, looking for instances of unintentional informality. Work on the grammar of
spoken language will help pupils identify more precisely the ways they have structured both
sentences and whole texts, and in turn this will develop more informed choices about how to
vary levels of formality in writing.
59
Useful resources
Giving a voice, QCA, 2003 (www.qca.org.uk/ages3-14/subjects/2933_1215.html)
New perspectives on spoken English in the classroom, QCA, 2003
(www.qca.org.uk/ages3-14/subjects/6111.html)
Not whether but how: teaching grammar in English at key stages 3 and 4, QCA, 1999
The grammar papers: perspectives on the teaching of grammar in the national curriculum, QCA, 1998
Drama objectives bank, DfES, 2003
Key objectives bank: Year 7, DfES, 2002
Key objectives bank: Year 8, DfES, 2002
Key objectives bank: Year 9, DfES, 2002
Speaking, listening, learning: working with children in key stages 1 and 2, DfES, 2003
(www.standards.dfes.gov.uk/literacy/publications/framework/818497/)
Further reading
Drama in schools, Arts Council England, 2003
Biber, D, Conrad, S and Leech, G, The Longman student grammar of spoken and written English,
Longman/Pearson, Harlow, 2002
Cameron, D, Good to talk?, Sage, London, 2000
Cameron, D, Working with spoken discourse, Sage, London, 2001
Carter, R, Language and creativity: the art of common talk, London, Routledge, 2004
Carter, R and McCarthy, M, Exploring spoken English, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1997
Carter, R and McCarthy, M, The Cambridge grammar of English, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
(forthcoming)
Cornbleet, S and Carter, R, The language of speech and writing, Routledge, London, 2002
Crystal, D, Language play, Penguin, Harmondsworth, 1998.
Eggins, S and Slade, D, Analysing conversation, Cassell, London, 1997
Halliday, M A K, Spoken and written language, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1989
Halliday, M A K, Introduction to functional grammar, Arnold, London, 1994
McCarthy, M, Discourse analysis for language teachers, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1991
McCarthy, M, ‘Discourse’ in Carter, R and Nunan, D (eds) The Cambridge guide to teaching English to speakers of
other languages, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2001
Nunan, D, An introduction to discourse analysis, Penguin, Harmondsworth, 1994
Williams, R, Keywords, Fontana, London, 1983, second edition
Wilson, P, Mind the gap: ellipsis and stylistic variation in spoken and written English, Longman, Harlow, 2000
60
EARLY YEARS
NATIONALCURRICULUM 5–16
GCSE
GNVQ
GCE A LEVEL
NVQ
OTHERVOCATIONALQUALIFICATIONS
For more copies, contact:
QCA Publications, PO Box 99, Sudbury, Suffolk CO10 2SN
(tel: 01787 884444; fax: 01787 312950)
This publication is available on the QCA website (www.qca.org.uk)
Price and order ref: £6 QCA/04/1291
261455
4 Curriculum and StandardsAudience English teachers, researchers, teacher trainers, literacy
coordinators, English advisers and inspectors, English language
departments in higher education
Circulation lists Secondary schools, LEAs, colleges, higher education institutions,
teacher training agencies
Type Guidance
Description Explanation of what makes spoken language distinctive as a
means of communication. Discussion of some of the key
features of the grammar of talk, exemplified by teaching
sequences
Cross ref New perspectives on spoken English in the classroom
(QCA, 2003)
Speaking, listening, learning: working with children in key
stages 1 and 2 (DfES, 2003)
Action required The use of this material is optional
Contact English team (020 7509 5734 englishteam@qca.org.uk)
For school use
top related